From: "Liu, Changpeng" <changpeng.liu@intel.com>
To: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Xia, Chenbo" <chenbo.xia@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] vhost: use try_lock in rte_vhost_vring_call
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 08:43:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB5093DBFC9691EE099F68A64CEE4C9@PH0PR11MB5093.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce550b77-44b7-a5c4-2cd9-0a580abde3bd@redhat.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 4:13 PM
> To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo.xia@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: use try_lock in rte_vhost_vring_call
>
>
>
> On 9/20/22 09:45, Liu, Changpeng wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 3:35 PM
> >> To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Cc: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo.xia@intel.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: use try_lock in rte_vhost_vring_call
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/20/22 09:29, Liu, Changpeng wrote:
> >>> Hi Maxime,
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 3:19 PM
> >>>> To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >>>> Cc: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo.xia@intel.com>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: use try_lock in rte_vhost_vring_call
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/6/22 04:22, Changpeng Liu wrote:
> >>>>> Note that this function is in data path, so the thread context
> >>>>> may not same as socket messages processing context, by using
> >>>>> try_lock here, users can have another try in case of VQ's access
> >>>>> lock is held by `vhost-events` thread.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Changpeng Liu <changpeng.liu@intel.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> lib/vhost/vhost.c | 6 +++++-
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/lib/vhost/vhost.c b/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> >>>>> index 60cb05a0ff..072d2acb7b 100644
> >>>>> --- a/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> >>>>> +++ b/lib/vhost/vhost.c
> >>>>> @@ -1329,7 +1329,11 @@ rte_vhost_vring_call(int vid, uint16_t vring_idx)
> >>>>> if (!vq)
> >>>>> return -1;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - rte_spinlock_lock(&vq->access_lock);
> >>>>> + if (!rte_spinlock_trylock(&vq->access_lock)) {
> >>>>> + VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(dev->ifname, DEBUG,
> >>>>> + "failed to kick guest, virtqueue busy.\n");
> >>>>> + return -1;
> >>>>> + }
> >>>>>
> >>>>> if (vq_is_packed(dev))
> >>>>> vhost_vring_call_packed(dev, vq);
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that's problematic, because it will break other applications
> >>>> that currently rely on the API to block until the call is done.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just some internal DPDK usage of this API:
> >>>> ./drivers/vdpa/ifc/ifcvf_vdpa.c:871: rte_vhost_vring_call(internal->vid,
> >>>> qid);
> >>>> ./examples/vhost/virtio_net.c:236: rte_vhost_vring_call(dev->vid,
> queue_id);
> >>>> ./examples/vhost/virtio_net.c:446: rte_vhost_vring_call(dev->vid,
> queue_id);
> >>>> ./examples/vhost_blk/vhost_blk.c:99:
> >>>> rte_vhost_vring_call(task->ctrlr->vid, vq->id);
> >>>> ./examples/vhost_blk/vhost_blk.c:134:
> >>>> rte_vhost_vring_call(task->ctrlr->vid, vq->id);
> >>>>
> >>>> This change will break all the above uses.
> >>>>
> >>>> And that's not counting external projects.
> >>>>
> >>>> ou should better introduce a new API that does not block.
> >>> Could you add a new API to do this?
> >> >
> >>> I think we can use the new API in SPDK as a workaround, note that SPDK
> project
> >> is blocked for
> >>> a while which can't be used with DPDK 22.05 or newer.
> >>
> >> DPDK v22.05?
> >> What is the commit introducing the regression?
> > Here is the commit introducing this issue
> > c5736998305d ("vhost: fix missing virtqueue lock protection")
> > Bugzilla ID: 1015
>
> Ok, it cannot be reverted, as it prevents some undefined
> behaviors/crashes.
>
> >>
> >> Note that if we introduce a new API, it won't be backported to stable
> >> branches.
> > I understand, but do we have better idea in short time? we're planning
> > to release SPDK 22.09 recently.
>
> You can have another thread that sends the call?
We already use two threads to do this. Here is the example for existing code in SPDK:
DPDK vhost-events thread SPDK thread
SET_VRING_KICK VQ1 ----> Start polling VQ1
Reply to DPDK <---- Done
SET_VRING_KICK VQ2 ----> thread is blocked on VQ's access lock, SPDK thread can't provide reply message
For example, we can just return for SET_VRING_KICK VQ2 message without checking SPDK thread, but this leave
uncertain replies to VM.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Vhost-blk and scsi devices are not same with vhost-net, we need to cover
> >> SeaBIOS and VM
> >>> cases, so we need to start processing vrings after 1 vring is ready.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Maxime
> >>>
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-20 8:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-06 2:22 Changpeng Liu
2022-09-06 21:15 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-09-07 0:40 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-09-20 7:12 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 2:24 ` Xia, Chenbo
2022-09-20 2:34 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-09-20 2:53 ` Xia, Chenbo
2022-09-20 3:00 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-09-20 7:23 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 7:30 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 7:19 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 7:29 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-09-20 7:34 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 7:45 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-09-20 8:12 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-20 8:43 ` Liu, Changpeng [this message]
2022-09-21 9:41 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-21 9:52 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-10-11 11:56 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-10-12 6:40 ` [PATCH v2] vhost: add new `rte_vhost_vring_call_nonblock` API Changpeng Liu
2022-10-13 7:56 ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-10-17 6:46 ` Xia, Chenbo
2022-10-17 7:17 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-10-17 7:14 ` [PATCH v3] " Changpeng Liu
2022-10-17 7:39 ` Xia, Chenbo
2022-10-17 7:50 ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-10-17 7:48 ` [PATCH v4] " Changpeng Liu
2022-10-19 5:27 ` Xia, Chenbo
2022-10-26 9:24 ` Xia, Chenbo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=PH0PR11MB5093DBFC9691EE099F68A64CEE4C9@PH0PR11MB5093.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=changpeng.liu@intel.com \
--cc=chenbo.xia@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).