qemu-s390x
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC PATCH] s390x/pci: vfio-pci breakage with disabled mem enforceme


From: Matthew Rosato
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] s390x/pci: vfio-pci breakage with disabled mem enforcement
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:37:41 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0

On 7/27/20 11:40 AM, Pierre Morel wrote:


On 2020-07-23 18:29, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:13:55 -0400
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

I noticed that after kernel commit abafbc55 'vfio-pci: Invalidate mmaps
and block MMIO access on disabled memory' vfio-pci via qemu on s390x
fails spectacularly, with errors in qemu like:

qemu-system-s390x: vfio_region_read(0001:00:00.0:region0+0x0, 4) failed: Input/output error

 From read to bar 0 originating out of hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c:zpci_read_bar().

So, I'm trying to figure out how to get vfio-pci happy again on s390x.  From
a bit of tracing, we seem to be triggering the new trap in
__vfio_pci_memory_enabled().  Sure enough, if I just force this function to
return 'true' as a test case, things work again.
The included patch attempts to enforce the setting, which restores everything to working order but also triggers vfio_bar_restore() in the process....  So
this isn't the right answer, more of a proof-of-concept.

@Alex: Any guidance on what needs to happen to make qemu-s390x happy with this
recent kernel change?

Bummer!  I won't claim to understand s390 PCI, but if we have a VF
exposed to the "host" (ie. the first level where vfio-pci is being
used), but we can't tell that it's a VF, how do we know whether the
memory bit in the command register is unimplemented because it's a VF
or unimplemented because the device doesn't support MMIO?  How are the
device ID, vendor ID, and BAR registers virtualized to the host?  Could
the memory enable bit also be emulated by that virtualization, much
like vfio-pci does for userspace?  If the other registers are
virtualized, but these command register bits are left unimplemented, do
we need code to deduce that we have a VF based on the existence of MMIO
BARs, but lack of memory enable bit?  Thanks,

Alex

Alex, Matt,

in s390 we have the possibility to assign a virtual function to a logical partition as function 0. In this case it can not be treated as a virtual function but must be treated as a physical function.
This is currently working very well.
However, these functions do not set PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY as we need.


Thanks for the explanation.

Shouldn't we fix this inside the kernel, to keep older QMEU working?

Yes, ideally.


Then would it be OK to add a new bit/boolean inside the pci_dev/vfio_pci_device like, is_detached_vfn, that we could set during enumeration and test inside __vfio_pci_memory_enabled() to return true?

In the enumeration we have the possibility to know if the function is a HW/Firmware virtual function on devfn 0 or if it is created by SRIOV.

It seems an easy fix without side effects.

What do you think?


From my perspective at least, this would resolve the issue and is in-line with the sort of suggestion Alex floated the other day of "do
we need code to deduce that we have a VF based on the existence of MMIO
BARs, but lack of memory enable bit?" -- it just sounds like a different way of coming to the conclusion. Effectively we need a way to say: 'for the purposes of memory_enable detection, treat this thing like a virtual function because it is one, even though it doesn't always act like one'



@Nilkas/@Pierre: I wonder if this might be related to host device is_virtfn?
I note that my host device lspci output looks like:

0000:00:00.0 Ethernet controller: Mellanox Technologies MT27710 Family [ConnectX-4 Lx Virtual Function]

But the device is not marked as is_virtfn..  Otherwise, Alex's fix
from htps://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/25/628 should cover the case.


I do not think we can fix this problem by forcing the is_virtfn bit.
AFAIU, our HW virtual function works a lot like a physical function.



Matthew Rosato (1):
   s390x/pci: Enforce PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY for vfio-pci

  hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c | 10 ++++++++++
  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)




Regards,
Pierre





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]