Re: [RFC v3 4/5] virtio_ring: add event idx support in packed ring

[Jason Wang]

On 2018å05æ08æ 17:44, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 05:34:40PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On 2018å05æ08æ 17:16, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 03:16:53PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > On 2018å05æ08æ 14:44, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:40:40PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > > On 2018å05æ08æ 11:05, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > > > > Because in virtqueue_enable_cb_delayed(), we may set an
> > > > > > > > event_off which is bigger than new and both of them have
> > > > > > > > wrapped. And in this case, although new is smaller than
> > > > > > > > event_off (i.e. the third param -- old), new shouldn't
> > > > > > > > add vq->num, and actually we are expecting a very big
> > > > > > > > idx diff.
> > > > > > > Yes, so to calculate distance correctly between event and new, we just
> > > > > > > need to compare the warp counter and return false if it doesn't match
> > > > > > > without the need to try to add vq.num here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Sorry, looks like the following should work, we need add vq.num if
> > > > > > used_wrap_counter does not match:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > static bool vhost_vring_packed_need_event(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ Â __u16 off_wrap, __u16 new,
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ Â __u16 old)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ bool wrap = off_wrap >> 15;
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ int off = off_wrap & ~(1 << 15);
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ __u16 d1, d2;
> > > > > >
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ if (wrap != vq->used_wrap_counter)
> > > > > >    ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ d1 = new + vq->num - off - 1;
> > > > > Just to draw your attention (maybe you have already
> > > > > noticed this).
> > > > I miss this, thanks!
> > > >
> > > > > In this case (i.e. wrap != vq->used_wrap_counter),
> > > > > it's also possible that (off < new) is true. Because,
> > > > >
> > > > > when virtqueue_enable_cb_delayed_packed() is used,
> > > > > `off` is calculated in driver in a way like this:
> > > > >
> > > > > 	off = vq->last_used_idx + bufs;
> > > > > 	if (off >= vq->vring_packed.num) {
> > > > > 		off -= vq->vring_packed.num;
> > > > > 		wrap_counter ^= 1;
> > > > > 	}
> > > > >
> > > > > And when `new` (in vhost) is close to vq->num. The
> > > > > vq->last_used_idx + bufs (in driver) can be bigger
> > > > > than vq->vring_packed.num, and:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. `off` will wrap;
> > > > > 2. wrap counters won't match;
> > > > > 3. off < new;
> > > > >
> > > > > And d1 (i.e. new + vq->num - off - 1) will be a value
> > > > > bigger than vq->num. I'm okay with this, although it's
> > > > > a bit weird.
> > > > So I'm considering something more compact by reusing vring_need_event() by
> > > > pretending a larger queue size and adding vq->num back when necessary:
> > > >
> > > > static bool vhost_vring_packed_need_event(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
> > > >   ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ Â __u16 off_wrap, __u16 new,
> > > >   ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ Â __u16 old)
> > > > {
> > > >   ÂÂÂ bool wrap = vq->used_wrap_counter;
> > > If the wrap counter is obtained from the vq,
> > > I think `new` should also be obtained from
> > > the vq. Or the wrap counter should be carried
> > > in `new`.
> > >
> > > >   ÂÂÂ int off = off_wrap & ~(1 << 15);
> > > >   ÂÂÂ __u16 d1, d2;
> > > >
> > > >   ÂÂÂ if (new < old) {
> > > >   ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ new += vq->num;
> > > >   ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ wrap ^= 1;
> > > >   ÂÂÂ }
> > > >
> > > >   ÂÂÂ if (wrap != off_wrap >> 15)
> > > >   ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ off += vq->num;
> > > When `new` and `old` wraps, and `off` doesn't wrap,
> > > wrap != (off_wrap >> 15) will be true. In this case,
> > > `off` is bigger than `new`, and what we should do
> > > is `off -= vq->num` instead of `off += vq->num`.
> > If I understand this correctly, if we track old correctly, it won't happen
> > if guest driver behave correctly. That means it should only happen for a
> > buggy driver (e.g trying to move off_wrap back).
> If vhost is faster than virtio driver, I guess above
> case may happen. The `old` and `new` will be updated
> each time we want to notify the driver. If the driver
> is slower, `old` and `new` in vhost may wrap before
> the `off` which is set by driver wraps.
>
> Best regards,
> Tiwei Bie

Oh, right.

But the code still work (in this case new - event_idx - 1 will 
underflow). (And I admit it still looks ugly).

Thanks