On 02/22/2017 09:28 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:58:39AM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 02/21/2017 10:45 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> On 21/02/17 16:31, Dan Streetman wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>>>> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 03:07:51PM -0500, Dan Streetman wrote:
>>>>>> Revert the main part of commit:
>>>>>> af42b8d12f8a ("xen: fix MSI setup and teardown for PV on HVM guests")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That commit introduced reading the pci device's msi message data to see
>>>>>> if a pirq was previously configured for the device's msi/msix, and re-use
>>>>>> that pirq. At the time, that was the correct behavior. However, a
>>>>>> later change to Qemu caused it to call into the Xen hypervisor to unmap
>>>>>> all pirqs for a pci device, when the pci device disables its MSI/MSIX
>>>>>> vectors; specifically the Qemu commit:
>>>>>> c976437c7dba9c7444fb41df45468968aaa326ad
>>>>>> ("qemu-xen: free all the pirqs for msi/msix when driver unload")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once Qemu added this pirq unmapping, it was no longer correct for the
>>>>>> kernel to re-use the pirq number cached in the pci device msi message
>>>>>> data. All Qemu releases since 2.1.0 contain the patch that unmaps the
>>>>>> pirqs when the pci device disables its MSI/MSIX vectors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This bug is causing failures to initialize multiple NVMe controllers
>>>>>> under Xen, because the NVMe driver sets up a single MSIX vector for
>>>>>> each controller (concurrently), and then after using that to talk to
>>>>>> the controller for some configuration data, it disables the single MSIX
>>>>>> vector and re-configures all the MSIX vectors it needs. So the MSIX
>>>>>> setup code tries to re-use the cached pirq from the first vector
>>>>>> for each controller, but the hypervisor has already given away that
>>>>>> pirq to another controller, and its initialization fails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is discussed in more detail at:
>>>>>> https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2017-01/msg00447.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: af42b8d12f8a ("xen: fix MSI setup and teardown for PV on HVM guests")
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Streetman <dan.streetman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> This doesn't seem to be applied yet, is it still waiting on another
>>>> ack? Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong git tree...
>>> Am I wrong or shouldn't this go through the PCI tree? Konrad?
>> Konrad is away this week but since pull request for Xen tree just went
>> out we should probably wait until rc1 anyway (unless something big comes
>> up before that).
> I assume this should go via the Xen or x86 tree, since that's how most
> arch/x86/pci/xen.c patches have been handled, including af42b8d12f8a.
> If you think otherwise, let me know.
OK, I applied it to Xen tree's for-linus-4.11.
-boris
