Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] ivshmem: use irqfd to interrupt among VMs

[liu ping fan]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2012-11-21 07:02, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> From: Liu Ping Fan <address@hidden>
>>
>> Using irqfd, so we can avoid switch between kernel and user when
>> VMs interrupts each other.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  hw/ivshmem.c |   48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ivshmem.c b/hw/ivshmem.c
>> index f6dbb21..81c7354 100644
>> --- a/hw/ivshmem.c
>> +++ b/hw/ivshmem.c
>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>>  #include "hw.h"
>>  #include "pc.h"
>>  #include "pci.h"
>> +#include "msi.h"
>>  #include "msix.h"
>>  #include "kvm.h"
>>  #include "migration.h"
>> @@ -54,6 +55,11 @@ typedef struct EventfdEntry {
>>      int vector;
>>  } EventfdEntry;
>>
>> +typedef struct IrqfdEntry {
>> +    int virq;
>> +    bool used;
>
> used = (virq != -1), so it should be redundant, and you can reduce
> IrqfdEntry to a plain int holding the virq.
>
Applied,

>> +} IrqfdEntry;
>> +
>>  typedef struct IVShmemState {
>>      PCIDevice dev;
>>      uint32_t intrmask;
>> @@ -83,6 +89,8 @@ typedef struct IVShmemState {
>>      uint32_t vectors;
>>      uint32_t features;
>>      EventfdEntry *eventfd_table;
>> +    IrqfdEntry *vector_irqfd;
>> +    bool irqfd_enable;
>>
>>      Error *migration_blocker;
>>
>> @@ -632,6 +640,38 @@ static void ivshmem_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, 
>> uint32_t address,
>>      msix_write_config(pci_dev, address, val, len);
>>  }
>>
>> +static int ivshmem_vector_use(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector,
>> +                                     MSIMessage msg)
>> +{
>> +    IVShmemState *s = DO_UPCAST(IVShmemState, dev, dev);
>> +    int virq;
>> +    EventNotifier *n = &s->peers[s->vm_id].eventfds[vector];
>> +
>> +    virq = kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route(kvm_state, msg);
>> +    if (virq >= 0 && kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier(kvm_state, n, virq) >= 
>> 0) {
>> +        s->vector_irqfd[vector].virq = virq;
>> +        s->vector_irqfd[vector].used = true;
>> +        qemu_chr_add_handlers(s->eventfd_chr[vector], NULL, NULL, NULL, 
>> NULL);
>> +    } else if (virq >= 0) {
>> +        kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, virq);
>> +    }
>> +    return 0;
>
> You drop the errors here. Better refactor the code to a scheme like this:
>
In msix_fire_vector_notifier(), there is "assert(ret >= 0);".  But I
think ivshmem can work even if irqfd can not be established, and fall
back to the origin scheme. So here just ignore err. Is it proper?

> err = service();
> if (err) {
>     roll_back();
>     return err;
>     /* or: goto roll_back_... */
> }
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void ivshmem_vector_release(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector)
>> +{
>> +    IVShmemState *s = DO_UPCAST(IVShmemState, dev, dev);
>> +    EventNotifier *n = &s->peers[s->vm_id].eventfds[vector];
>> +    int virq = s->vector_irqfd[vector].virq;
>> +
>> +    if (s->vector_irqfd[vector].used) {
>> +        kvm_irqchip_remove_irqfd_notifier(kvm_state, n, virq);
>> +        kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, virq);
>> +        s->vector_irqfd[vector].virq = -1;
>> +        s->vector_irqfd[vector].used = false;
>> +    }
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int pci_ivshmem_init(PCIDevice *dev)
>>  {
>>      IVShmemState *s = DO_UPCAST(IVShmemState, dev, dev);
>> @@ -759,7 +799,13 @@ static int pci_ivshmem_init(PCIDevice *dev)
>>      }
>>
>>      s->dev.config_write = ivshmem_write_config;
>> -
>> +    if (kvm_gsi_routing_enabled()) {
>> +        s->irqfd_enable = msix_set_vector_notifiers(dev, ivshmem_vector_use,
>> +                    ivshmem_vector_release) >= 0 ? true : false;
>> +        if (s->irqfd_enable) {
>> +            s->vector_irqfd = g_new0(IrqfdEntry, s->vectors);
>
> Conceptually, msix_set_vector_notifiers can already call
> ivshmem_vector_use, so this initialization would come too late. Doesn't
> happen here as MSI-X is still off during device init. However, just
> perform vector_irqfd allocation unconditionally before the registration.
>
Applied,
> And where do you free it again...?
>
Will fix it.

And I think, this is the way to push interrupt subsystem out of big
lock for KVM.  For TCG code, we can use something like
kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route(). How do you think about it?

Regards,
Pingfan
>> +        }
>> +    }
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>
>>
>
> Jan
>
> --
> Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
> Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux