Re: [PATCH 1/2] vdpa/mlx5: Fix mr->initialized semantics
From: Si-Wei Liu
Date: Thu Aug 03 2023 - 13:58:11 EST
On 8/3/2023 1:03 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 1:13 AM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The mr->initialized flag is shared between the control vq and data vq
part of the mr init/uninit. But if the control vq and data vq get placed
in different ASIDs, it can happen that initializing the control vq will
prevent the data vq mr from being initialized.
This patch consolidates the control and data vq init parts into their
own init functions. The mr->initialized will now be used for the data vq
only. The control vq currently doesn't need a flag.
The uninitializing part is also taken care of: mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr got
split into data and control vq functions which are now also ASID aware.
Fixes: 8fcd20c30704 ("vdpa/mlx5: Support different address spaces for control and data")
Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <gal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h | 1 +
drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
2 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
index 25fc4120b618..a0420be5059f 100644
--- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
+++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct mlx5_vdpa_mr {
struct list_head head;
unsigned long num_directs;
unsigned long num_klms;
+ /* state of dvq mr */
bool initialized;
/* serialize mkey creation and destruction */
diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
index 03e543229791..4ae14a248a4b 100644
--- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
+++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
@@ -489,60 +489,103 @@ static void destroy_user_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev, struct mlx5_vdpa_mr *mr
}
}
-void mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev)
+static void _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_cvq_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev, unsigned int asid)
+{
+ if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_CVQ_GROUP] != asid)
+ return;
+
+ prune_iotlb(mvdev);
+}
+
+static void _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_dvq_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev, unsigned int asid)
{
struct mlx5_vdpa_mr *mr = &mvdev->mr;
- mutex_lock(&mr->mkey_mtx);
+ if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_DATAVQ_GROUP] != asid)
+ return;
+
if (!mr->initialized)
- goto out;
+ return;
- prune_iotlb(mvdev);
if (mr->user_mr)
destroy_user_mr(mvdev, mr);
else
destroy_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
mr->initialized = false;
-out:
+}
+
+static void mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr_asid(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev, unsigned int asid)
+{
+ struct mlx5_vdpa_mr *mr = &mvdev->mr;
+
+ mutex_lock(&mr->mkey_mtx);
+
+ _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_dvq_mr(mvdev, asid);
+ _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_cvq_mr(mvdev, asid);
+
mutex_unlock(&mr->mkey_mtx);
}
-static int _mlx5_vdpa_create_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
- struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb, unsigned int asid)
+void mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev)
+{
+ mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr_asid(mvdev, mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_CVQ_GROUP]);
+ mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr_asid(mvdev, mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_DATAVQ_GROUP]);
+}
+
+static int _mlx5_vdpa_create_cvq_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
+ struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb,
+ unsigned int asid)
+{
+ if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_CVQ_GROUP] != asid)
+ return 0;
+
+ return dup_iotlb(mvdev, iotlb);
This worries me as conceptually, there should be no difference between
dvq mr and cvq mr. The virtqueue should be loosely coupled with mr.
One example is that, if we only do dup_iotlb() but not try to create
dma mr here, we will break virtio-vdpa:
For this case, I guess we may need another way to support virtio-vdpa
1:1 mapping rather than overloading virtio device reset semantics, see:
https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@xxxxxxxxxx/msg953755.html
> Conceptually, the address mapping is not a part of the abstraction for
> a virtio device now. So resetting the memory mapping during virtio
> device reset seems wrong.
where we want to keep memory mapping intact across virtio device reset
for best live migration latency/downtime. I wonder would it work to
reset the mapping in vhost-vdpa life cycle out of virtio reset, say
introduce a .reset_map() op to restore 1:1 mapping within
vhost_vdpa_remove_as() right after vhost_vdpa_iotlb_unmap()? Then we can
move the iotlb reset logic to there without worry breaking virtio-vdpa.
Thanks,
-Siwei
commit 6f5312f801836e6af9bcbb0bdb44dc423e129206
Author: Eli Cohen <elic@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Jun 2 11:58:54 2021 +0300
vdpa/mlx5: Add support for running with virtio_vdpa
In order to support running vdpa using vritio_vdpa driver, we need to
create a different kind of MR, one that has 1:1 mapping, since the
addresses referring to virtqueues are dma addresses.
We create the 1:1 MR in mlx5_vdpa_dev_add() only in case firmware
supports the general capability umem_uid_0. The reason for that is that
1:1 MRs must be created with uid == 0 while virtqueue objects can be
created with uid == 0 only when the firmware capability is on.
If the set_map() callback is called with new translations provided
through iotlb, the driver will destroy the 1:1 MR and create a regular
one.
Signed-off-by: Eli Cohen <elic@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210602085854.62690-1-elic@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks
+}
+
+static int _mlx5_vdpa_create_dvq_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
+ struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb,
+ unsigned int asid)
{
struct mlx5_vdpa_mr *mr = &mvdev->mr;
int err;
- if (mr->initialized)
+ if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_DATAVQ_GROUP] != asid)
return 0;
- if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_DATAVQ_GROUP] == asid) {
- if (iotlb)
- err = create_user_mr(mvdev, iotlb);
- else
- err = create_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
+ if (mr->initialized)
+ return 0;
- if (err)
- return err;
- }
+ if (iotlb)
+ err = create_user_mr(mvdev, iotlb);
+ else
+ err = create_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
- if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_CVQ_GROUP] == asid) {
- err = dup_iotlb(mvdev, iotlb);
- if (err)
- goto out_err;
- }
+ if (err)
+ return err;
mr->initialized = true;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int _mlx5_vdpa_create_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
+ struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb, unsigned int asid)
+{
+ int err;
+
+ err = _mlx5_vdpa_create_dvq_mr(mvdev, iotlb, asid);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+
+ err = _mlx5_vdpa_create_cvq_mr(mvdev, iotlb, asid);
+ if (err)
+ goto out_err;
+
return 0;
out_err:
- if (mvdev->group2asid[MLX5_VDPA_DATAVQ_GROUP] == asid) {
- if (iotlb)
- destroy_user_mr(mvdev, mr);
- else
- destroy_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
- }
+ _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_dvq_mr(mvdev, asid);
return err;
}
--
2.41.0
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization