Hi Stefan,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:57:44PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 11:38:58PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The virtio pstore driver provides interface to the pstore subsystem so
> > that the guest kernel's log/dump message can be saved on the host
> > machine. Users can access the log file directly on the host, or on the
> > guest at the next boot using pstore filesystem. It currently deals with
> > kernel log (printk) buffer only, but we can extend it to have other
> > information (like ftrace dump) later.
> >
> > It supports legacy PCI device using a 16K buffer by default and it's
> > configurable. It uses two virtqueues - one for (sync) read and another
> > for (async) write. Since it cannot wait for write finished, it supports
> > up to 128 concurrent IO.
>
> Please document the locks that this code relies on. It is generally not
> safe to call virtqueue_*() from multiple threads. I also wonder about
> locking for virtio_pstore->req_id and other fields. Are locks missing
> or is something in pstore ensuring safety?
Ok, I should use atomic inc for pstore->req_id. The open-read-close
are serialized by the read_mutex of pstore_info. Write can happend
anytime so I gave it a dedicate queue.
Erase is a problem though, normally it's only doable after mount
operation is done so no contention to the open-read-close. But if the
pstore_update_ms is set, timer routine can schedule a work to do the
open-read-close loop which might contend to erase.
I'm not sure how useful pstore_update_ms is and the descriptoin saids
"milliseconds before pstore updates its content "
"(default is -1, which means runtime updates are disabled; "
"enabling this option is not safe, it may lead to further "
"corruption on Oopses)")
>
> > +static int virt_pstore_open(struct pstore_info *psi)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps = psi->data;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_req *req;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_res *res;
> > + struct scatterlist sgo[1], sgi[1];
> > + struct scatterlist *sgs[2] = { sgo, sgi };
> > + unsigned int len;
> > +
> > + virt_pstore_get_reqs(vps, &req, &res);
> > +
> > + req->cmd = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PSTORE_CMD_OPEN);
> > +
> > + sg_init_one(sgo, req, sizeof(*req));
> > + sg_init_one(sgi, res, sizeof(*res));
> > + virtqueue_add_sgs(vps->vq[0], sgs, 1, 1, vps, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + virtqueue_kick(vps->vq[0]);
> > +
> > + wait_event(vps->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vps->vq[0], &len));
> > + return le32_to_cpu(res->ret);
>
> This assumes the device puts compatible Linux errno values in res->ret.
> The function doesn't need to return -errno if I'm reading fs/pstore/
> code correctly. You could return -1 on error to avoid making this
> assumption. The same applies to other res->ret usage below.
Ok.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virt_pstore_close(struct pstore_info *psi)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps = psi->data;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_req *req = &vps->req[vps->req_id];
> > + struct virtio_pstore_res *res = &vps->res[vps->req_id];
>
> Assigning &vps->req[vps->req_id]/&vps->res[vps->req_id] is unnecessary,
> virt_pstore_get_reqs() handles that below.
Ah, right.
>
> > + struct scatterlist sgo[1], sgi[1];
> > + struct scatterlist *sgs[2] = { sgo, sgi };
> > + unsigned int len;
> > +
> > + virt_pstore_get_reqs(vps, &req, &res);
> > +
> > + req->cmd = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PSTORE_CMD_CLOSE);
> > +
> > + sg_init_one(sgo, req, sizeof(*req));
> > + sg_init_one(sgi, res, sizeof(*res));
> > + virtqueue_add_sgs(vps->vq[0], sgs, 1, 1, vps, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + virtqueue_kick(vps->vq[0]);
> > +
> > + wait_event(vps->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vps->vq[0], &len));
> > + return le32_to_cpu(res->ret);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static ssize_t virt_pstore_read(u64 *id, enum pstore_type_id *type,
> > + int *count, struct timespec *time,
> > + char **buf, bool *compressed,
> > + ssize_t *ecc_notice_size,
> > + struct pstore_info *psi)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps = psi->data;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_req *req;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_res *res;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_fileinfo info;
> > + struct scatterlist sgo[1], sgi[3];
> > + struct scatterlist *sgs[2] = { sgo, sgi };
> > + unsigned int len;
> > + unsigned int flags;
> > + int ret;
> > + void *bf;
> > +
> > + virt_pstore_get_reqs(vps, &req, &res);
> > +
> > + req->cmd = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PSTORE_CMD_READ);
> > +
> > + sg_init_one(sgo, req, sizeof(*req));
> > + sg_init_table(sgi, 3);
> > + sg_set_buf(&sgi[0], res, sizeof(*res));
> > + sg_set_buf(&sgi[1], &info, sizeof(info));
> > + sg_set_buf(&sgi[2], psi->buf, psi->bufsize);
> > + virtqueue_add_sgs(vps->vq[0], sgs, 1, 1, vps, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + virtqueue_kick(vps->vq[0]);
> > +
> > + wait_event(vps->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vps->vq[0], &len));
> > + if (len < sizeof(*res) + sizeof(info))
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + ret = le32_to_cpu(res->ret);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + len = le32_to_cpu(info.len);
>
> We trust the device but a length check would be nice here to be clear
> that the memcpy() below is always safe:
>
> if (len > psi->bufsize)
> return -1;
Good point.
>
> > +
> > + bf = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (bf == NULL)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
>
> There's no point in returning -ENOMEM if we return -1 and res->ret
> above. The caller has no way of knowing the true meaning of the return
> value. I would return -1 to be clear that there are no error constants.
Ok.
>
> > +
> > + *id = le64_to_cpu(info.id);
> > + *type = from_virtio_type(info.type);
> > + *count = le32_to_cpu(info.count);
> > +
> > + flags = le32_to_cpu(info.flags);
> > + *compressed = flags & VIRTIO_PSTORE_FL_COMPRESSED;
> > +
> > + time->tv_sec = le64_to_cpu(info.time_sec);
> > + time->tv_nsec = le32_to_cpu(info.time_nsec);
> > +
> > + memcpy(bf, psi->buf, len);
> > + *buf = bf;
> > +
> > + return len;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int notrace virt_pstore_write(enum pstore_type_id type,
> > + enum kmsg_dump_reason reason,
> > + u64 *id, unsigned int part, int count,
> > + bool compressed, size_t size,
> > + struct pstore_info *psi)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps = psi->data;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_req *req;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_res *res;
> > + struct scatterlist sgo[2], sgi[1];
> > + struct scatterlist *sgs[2] = { sgo, sgi };
> > + unsigned int flags = compressed ? VIRTIO_PSTORE_FL_COMPRESSED : 0;
> > +
> > + if (vps->failed)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + *id = vps->req_id;
> > + virt_pstore_get_reqs(vps, &req, &res);
>
> This function does not wait for a response from the device so you cannot
> call virt_pstore_get_reqs() without risk of reusing an in-flight buffer.
Right. This part is debatable IMHO.
Generally pstore is used to dump oops buffer when kernel is dying.
This is an occasional event so I think it's ok with the current code.
The problematic case is when other writers (console, pmsg or ftrace)
are enabled. They might contend with the oops, but pstore serializes
them with a spinlock. But as you said it still has a risk of reusing
the in-flight buffer. I think it's okay that oops overwriting other,
but the reverse is not good. I tried to mitigate the problem by
managing the buffer position to spread out the write but it's not a
complete solution.
I thought simply stopping the guest when writing oops, or we might
create a way to tell pstore to stop other writers (until writing oops
finished) somehow.
Kees, what do you think?
>
> > +
> > + req->cmd = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PSTORE_CMD_WRITE);
> > + req->type = to_virtio_type(type);
> > + req->flags = cpu_to_le32(flags);
> > +
> > + sg_init_table(sgo, 2);
> > + sg_set_buf(&sgo[0], req, sizeof(*req));
> > + sg_set_buf(&sgo[1], psi->buf, size);
> > + sg_init_one(sgi, res, sizeof(*res));
> > + virtqueue_add_sgs(vps->vq[1], sgs, 1, 1, vps, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> If we don't wait for request completion then virtqueue_add_sgs() could
> fail here if the virtqueue is already full.
Ah, didn't known that. So we need to wait for completion somehow.
>
> > + virtqueue_kick(vps->vq[1]);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virt_pstore_erase(enum pstore_type_id type, u64 id, int count,
> > + struct timespec time, struct pstore_info *psi)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps = psi->data;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_req *req;
> > + struct virtio_pstore_res *res;
> > + struct scatterlist sgo[1], sgi[1];
> > + struct scatterlist *sgs[2] = { sgo, sgi };
> > + unsigned int len;
> > +
> > + virt_pstore_get_reqs(vps, &req, &res);
> > +
> > + req->cmd = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PSTORE_CMD_ERASE);
> > + req->type = to_virtio_type(type);
> > + req->id = cpu_to_le64(id);
> > + req->count = cpu_to_le32(count);
> > +
> > + sg_init_one(sgo, req, sizeof(*req));
> > + sg_init_one(sgi, res, sizeof(*res));
> > + virtqueue_add_sgs(vps->vq[0], sgs, 1, 1, vps, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + virtqueue_kick(vps->vq[0]);
>
> Erase commands are sent on the "read" virtqueue, not the "write"
> virtqueue?
Yes, you can think they're sync and async queues. The write is the
only async operation.
>
> > +
> > + wait_event(vps->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vps->vq[0], &len));
> > + return le32_to_cpu(res->ret);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virt_pstore_init(struct virtio_pstore *vps)
> > +{
> > + struct pstore_info *psinfo = &vps->pstore;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (!psinfo->bufsize)
> > + psinfo->bufsize = VIRT_PSTORE_BUFSIZE;
> > +
> > + psinfo->buf = alloc_pages_exact(psinfo->bufsize, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!psinfo->buf) {
> > + pr_err("cannot allocate pstore buffer\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + psinfo->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > + psinfo->name = "virtio";
> > + psinfo->open = virt_pstore_open;
> > + psinfo->close = virt_pstore_close;
> > + psinfo->read = virt_pstore_read;
> > + psinfo->erase = virt_pstore_erase;
> > + psinfo->write = virt_pstore_write;
> > + psinfo->flags = PSTORE_FLAGS_FRAGILE;
> > +
> > + psinfo->data = vps;
> > + spin_lock_init(&psinfo->buf_lock);
> > +
> > + err = pstore_register(psinfo);
> > + if (err)
> > + kfree(psinfo->buf);
>
> Should this be free_pages_exact() instead of kfree()?
Oops, right.
>
> Is it safe to call pstore_register() before the remaining initialization
> steps?
>
> My understanding is that if pstore is already mounted then requests will
> immediately be sent. In order to support this we'd need to initialize
> everything else first before calling pstore_register().
Fair enough. Will change.
>
> > +
> > + return err;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virt_pstore_exit(struct virtio_pstore *vps)
> > +{
> > + struct pstore_info *psinfo = &vps->pstore;
> > +
> > + pstore_unregister(psinfo);
> > +
> > + free_pages_exact(psinfo->buf, psinfo->bufsize);
> > + psinfo->buf = NULL;
> > + psinfo->bufsize = 0;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virtpstore_init_vqs(struct virtio_pstore *vps)
> > +{
> > + vq_callback_t *callbacks[] = { virtpstore_ack, virtpstore_check };
> > + const char *names[] = { "pstore_read", "pstore_write" };
> > +
> > + return vps->vdev->config->find_vqs(vps->vdev, 2, vps->vq,
> > + callbacks, names);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void virtpstore_init_config(struct virtio_pstore *vps)
> > +{
> > + u32 bufsize;
> > +
> > + virtio_cread(vps->vdev, struct virtio_pstore_config, bufsize, &bufsize);
> > +
> > + vps->pstore.bufsize = PAGE_ALIGN(bufsize);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void virtpstore_confirm_config(struct virtio_pstore *vps)
> > +{
> > + u32 bufsize = vps->pstore.bufsize;
> > +
> > + virtio_cwrite(vps->vdev, struct virtio_pstore_config, bufsize,
> > + &bufsize);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virtpstore_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > +{
> > + struct virtio_pstore *vps;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (!vdev->config->get) {
> > + dev_err(&vdev->dev, "driver init: config access disabled\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + vdev->priv = vps = kzalloc(sizeof(*vps), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!vps) {
> > + err = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + vps->vdev = vdev;
> > +
> > + err = virtpstore_init_vqs(vps);
> > + if (err < 0)
> > + goto out_free;
> > +
> > + virtpstore_init_config(vps);
> > +
> > + err = virt_pstore_init(vps);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto out_del_vq;
> > +
> > + virtpstore_confirm_config(vps);
> > +
> > + init_waitqueue_head(&vps->acked);
> > +
> > + virtio_device_ready(vdev);
>
> This call is needed if the .probe() function uses virtqueues before
> returning. Right now it either doesn't use the virtqueues or it has
> already used them in virt_pstore_init(). Please move this before
> pstore_register().
Will do.
Thank you so much for your detailed review!
Namhyung
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
