DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
To: "Liu, Changpeng" <changpeng.liu@intel.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, 11 Oct 2022 13:56:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f1614eca-5fbd-e4f0-dde5-c7f7285a3cda@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR11MB509346AFE740B394C6CB81B8EE4F9@PH0PR11MB5093.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Hi Changpeng,

On 9/21/22 11:52, Liu, Changpeng wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 5:41 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 10:43, Liu, Changpeng wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----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.
>>
>> I'm sorry but you will have to find a workaround while v22.11 is out and
>> you can consume it. We can neither backport new API nor we can break all
>> the other applications not handling locking failure.
> By processing vhost-user message in asynchronous way in SPDK can be a
> workaround now, we can backport the workaround to SPDK earlier version
> so that it can work with distro DPDK releases.
>>
>> Regarding the new API for v22.11, I should be named something like
>> rte_vhost_vring_call_nonblock(), and ideally should return some like
>> -EAGAIN instead of -1 o that the applications can distinguish between a
>> real failure and a need for retry.
> Agreed, then we can switch to the new API finally.

Just a reminder that -rc2 is in ~ two weeks, have you prepared the patch
adding the new API?

Regards,
Maxime

>> Regards,
>> Maxime
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-11 11:56 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
2022-09-21  9:41             ` Maxime Coquelin
2022-09-21  9:52               ` Liu, Changpeng
2022-10-11 11:56                 ` Maxime Coquelin [this message]
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=f1614eca-5fbd-e4f0-dde5-c7f7285a3cda@redhat.com \
    --to=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
    --cc=changpeng.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=chenbo.xia@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /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).