Re: [PATCH vhost v2 4/8] vdpa/mlx5: Mark vq addrs for modification in hw vq

From: Dragos Tatulea
Date: Mon Dec 18 2023 - 05:55:27 EST

Next message: Andy Shevchenko: "Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] device property: Implement device_is_big_endian()"
Previous message: Ryan Roberts: "[PATCH v4 16/16] arm64/mm: Implement clear_ptes() to optimize exit, munmap, dontneed"
In reply to: Eugenio Perez Martin: "Re: [PATCH vhost v2 4/8] vdpa/mlx5: Mark vq addrs for modification in hw vq"
Next in thread: Eugenio Perez Martin: "Re: [PATCH vhost v2 4/8] vdpa/mlx5: Mark vq addrs for modification in hw vq"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, 2023-12-18 at 11:16 +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 12:03 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2023-12-15 at 18:56 +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 3:13 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2023-12-15 at 12:35 +0000, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2023-12-14 at 19:30 +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 4:51 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-12-14 at 08:45 -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 01:39:55PM +0000, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 15:44 -0800, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/12/2023 11:21 AM, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 11:46 AM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Addresses get set by .set_vq_address. hw vq addresses will be updated on
> > > > > > > > > > > > next modify_virtqueue.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Gal Pressman <gal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm kind of ok with this patch and the next one about state, but I
> > > > > > > > > > > didn't ack them in the previous series.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > My main concern is that it is not valid to change the vq address after
> > > > > > > > > > > DRIVER_OK in VirtIO, which vDPA follows. Only memory maps are ok to
> > > > > > > > > > > change at this moment. I'm not sure about vq state in vDPA, but vhost
> > > > > > > > > > > forbids changing it with an active backend.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Suspend is not defined in VirtIO at this moment though, so maybe it is
> > > > > > > > > > > ok to decide that all of these parameters may change during suspend.
> > > > > > > > > > > Maybe the best thing is to protect this with a vDPA feature flag.
> > > > > > > > > > I think protect with vDPA feature flag could work, while on the other
> > > > > > > > > > hand vDPA means vendor specific optimization is possible around suspend
> > > > > > > > > > and resume (in case it helps performance), which doesn't have to be
> > > > > > > > > > backed by virtio spec. Same applies to vhost user backend features,
> > > > > > > > > > variations there were not backed by spec either. Of course, we should
> > > > > > > > > > try best to make the default behavior backward compatible with
> > > > > > > > > > virtio-based backend, but that circles back to no suspend definition in
> > > > > > > > > > the current virtio spec, for which I hope we don't cease development on
> > > > > > > > > > vDPA indefinitely. After all, the virtio based vdap backend can well
> > > > > > > > > > define its own feature flag to describe (minor difference in) the
> > > > > > > > > > suspend behavior based on the later spec once it is formed in future.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So what is the way forward here? From what I understand the options are:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1) Add a vdpa feature flag for changing device properties while suspended.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2) Drop these 2 patches from the series for now. Not sure if this makes sense as
> > > > > > > > > this. But then Si-Wei's qemu device suspend/resume poc [0] that exercises this
> > > > > > > > > code won't work anymore. This means the series would be less well tested.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Are there other possible options? What do you think?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [0] https://github.com/siwliu-kernel/qemu/tree/svq-resume-wip
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am fine with either of these.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How about allowing the change only under the following conditions:
> > > > > > > vhost_vdpa_can_suspend && vhost_vdpa_can_resume &&
> > > > > > > VHOST_BACKEND_F_ENABLE_AFTER_DRIVER_OK is set
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think the best option by far is 1, as there is no hint in the
> > > > > > combination of these 3 indicating that you can change device
> > > > > > properties in the suspended state.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Sure. Will respin a v3 without these two patches.
> > > > >
> > > > > Another series can implement option 2 and add these 2 patches on top.
> > > > Hmm...I misunderstood your statement and sent a erroneus v3. You said that
> > > > having a feature flag is the best option.
> > > >
> > > > Will add a feature flag in v4: is this similar to the
> > > > VHOST_BACKEND_F_ENABLE_AFTER_DRIVER_OK flag?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Right, it should be easy to return it from .get_backend_features op if
> > > the FW returns that capability, isn't it?
> > >
> > Yes, that's easy. But I wonder if we need one feature bit for each type of
> > change:
> > - VHOST_BACKEND_F_CHANGEABLE_VQ_ADDR_IN_SUSPEND
> > - VHOST_BACKEND_F_CHANGEABLE_VQ_STATE_IN_SUSPEND
> >
>
> I'd say yes. Although we could configure SVQ initial state in userland
> as different than 0 for this first step, it would be needed in the
> long term.
>
> > Or would a big one VHOST_BACKEND_F_CAN_RECONFIG_VQ_IN_SUSPEND suffice?
> >
>
> I'd say "reconfig vq" is not valid as mlx driver doesn't allow
> changing queue sizes, for example, isn't it?
>
Modifying the queue size for a vq is indeed not supported by the mlx device.

> To define that it is
> valid to change "all parameters" seems very confident.
>
Ack

> > To me having individual feature bits makes sense. But it could also takes too
> > many bits if more changes are required.
> >
>
> Yes, that's a good point. Maybe it is valid to define a subset of
> features that can be changed., but I think it is way clearer to just
> check for individual feature bits.
>
I will prepare extra patches with the 2 feature bits approach.

Is it necessary to add checks in the vdpa core that block changing these
properties if the state is driver ok and the device doesn't support the feature?

> > Thanks,
> > Dragos
> >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Dragos
> > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Dragos
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Dragos
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > -Siwei
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jason, what do you think?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c | 9 +++++++++
> > > > > > > > > > > > include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc_vdpa.h | 1 +
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > index f8f088cced50..80e066de0866 100644
> > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1209,6 +1209,7 @@ static int modify_virtqueue(struct mlx5_vdpa_net *ndev,
> > > > > > > > > > > > bool state_change = false;
> > > > > > > > > > > > void *obj_context;
> > > > > > > > > > > > void *cmd_hdr;
> > > > > > > > > > > > + void *vq_ctx;
> > > > > > > > > > > > void *in;
> > > > > > > > > > > > int err;
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1230,6 +1231,7 @@ static int modify_virtqueue(struct mlx5_vdpa_net *ndev,
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_SET(general_obj_in_cmd_hdr, cmd_hdr, uid, ndev->mvdev.res.uid);
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > obj_context = MLX5_ADDR_OF(modify_virtio_net_q_in, in, obj_context);
> > > > > > > > > > > > + vq_ctx = MLX5_ADDR_OF(virtio_net_q_object, obj_context, virtio_q_context);
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > if (mvq->modified_fields & MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_STATE) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > if (!is_valid_state_change(mvq->fw_state, state, is_resumable(ndev))) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1241,6 +1243,12 @@ static int modify_virtqueue(struct mlx5_vdpa_net *ndev,
> > > > > > > > > > > > state_change = true;
> > > > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > + if (mvq->modified_fields & MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_VIRTIO_Q_ADDRS) {
> > > > > > > > > > > > + MLX5_SET64(virtio_q, vq_ctx, desc_addr, mvq->desc_addr);
> > > > > > > > > > > > + MLX5_SET64(virtio_q, vq_ctx, used_addr, mvq->device_addr);
> > > > > > > > > > > > + MLX5_SET64(virtio_q, vq_ctx, available_addr, mvq->driver_addr);
> > > > > > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_SET64(virtio_net_q_object, obj_context, modify_field_select, mvq->modified_fields);
> > > > > > > > > > > > err = mlx5_cmd_exec(ndev->mvdev.mdev, in, inlen, out, sizeof(out));
> > > > > > > > > > > > if (err)
> > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -2202,6 +2210,7 @@ static int mlx5_vdpa_set_vq_address(struct vdpa_device *vdev, u16 idx, u64 desc_
> > > > > > > > > > > > mvq->desc_addr = desc_area;
> > > > > > > > > > > > mvq->device_addr = device_area;
> > > > > > > > > > > > mvq->driver_addr = driver_area;
> > > > > > > > > > > > + mvq->modified_fields |= MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_VIRTIO_Q_ADDRS;
> > > > > > > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc_vdpa.h b/include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc_vdpa.h
> > > > > > > > > > > > index b86d51a855f6..9594ac405740 100644
> > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc_vdpa.h
> > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/mlx5/mlx5_ifc_vdpa.h
> > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ enum {
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_STATE = (u64)1 << 0,
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_DIRTY_BITMAP_PARAMS = (u64)1 << 3,
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_DIRTY_BITMAP_DUMP_ENABLE = (u64)1 << 4,
> > > > > > > > > > > > + MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_VIRTIO_Q_ADDRS = (u64)1 << 6,
> > > > > > > > > > > > MLX5_VIRTQ_MODIFY_MASK_DESC_GROUP_MKEY = (u64)1 << 14,
> > > > > > > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2.42.0
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Next message: Andy Shevchenko: "Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] device property: Implement device_is_big_endian()"
Previous message: Ryan Roberts: "[PATCH v4 16/16] arm64/mm: Implement clear_ptes() to optimize exit, munmap, dontneed"
In reply to: Eugenio Perez Martin: "Re: [PATCH vhost v2 4/8] vdpa/mlx5: Mark vq addrs for modification in hw vq"
Next in thread: Eugenio Perez Martin: "Re: [PATCH vhost v2 4/8] vdpa/mlx5: Mark vq addrs for modification in hw vq"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]