+ virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+ jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx
+ mst@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 at 10:20, Arnaud POULIQUEN
<arnaud.pouliquen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 6/29/22 19:43, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi Anup,
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 10:43:34PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> >> The rpmsg_probe() is broken at the moment because virtqueue_add_inbuf()
> >> fails due to both virtqueues (Rx and Tx) marked as broken by the
> >> __vring_new_virtqueue() function. To solve this, virtio_device_ready()
> >> (which unbreaks queues) should be called before virtqueue_add_inbuf().
> >>
> >> Fixes: 8b4ec69d7e09 ("virtio: harden vring IRQ")
> >> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/rpmsg/virtio_rpmsg_bus.c | 6 +++---
> >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/rpmsg/virtio_rpmsg_bus.c b/drivers/rpmsg/virtio_rpmsg_bus.c
> >> index 905ac7910c98..71a64d2c7644 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/rpmsg/virtio_rpmsg_bus.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/rpmsg/virtio_rpmsg_bus.c
> >> @@ -929,6 +929,9 @@ static int rpmsg_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> >> /* and half is dedicated for TX */
> >> vrp->sbufs = bufs_va + total_buf_space / 2;
> >>
> >> + /* From this point on, we can notify and get callbacks. */
> >> + virtio_device_ready(vdev);
> >> +
> >
> > Calling virtio_device_ready() here means that virtqueue_get_buf_ctx_split() can
> > potentially be called (by way of rpmsg_recv_done()), which will race with
> > virtqueue_add_inbuf(). If buffers in the virtqueue aren't available then
> > rpmsg_recv_done() will fail, potentially breaking remote processors' state
> > machines that don't expect their initial name service to fail when the "device"
> > has been marked as ready.
> >
> > What does make me curious though is that nobody on the remoteproc mailing list
> > has complained about commit 8b4ec69d7e09 breaking their environment... By now,
> > i.e rc4, that should have happened. Anyone from TI, ST and Xilinx care to test this on
> > their rig?
>
> I tested on STm32mp1 board using tag v5.19-rc4(03c765b0e3b4)
> I confirm the issue!
>
> Concerning the solution, I share Mathieu's concern. This could break legacy.
> I made a short test and I would suggest to use __virtio_unbreak_device instead, tounbreak the virtqueues without changing the init sequence.
>
> I this case the patch would be:
>
> + /*
> + * Unbreak the virtqueues to allow to add buffers before setting the vdev status
> + * to ready
> + */
> + __virtio_unbreak_device(vdev);
> +
>
> /* set up the receive buffers */
> for (i = 0; i < vrp->num_bufs / 2; i++) {
> struct scatterlist sg;
> void *cpu_addr = vrp->rbufs + i * vrp->buf_size;
This will indeed fix the problem. On the flip side the kernel
documentation for __virtio_unbreak_device() puzzles me...
It clearly states that it should be used for probing and restoring but
_not_ directly by the driver. Function rpmsg_probe() is part of
probing but also the entry point to a driver.
Michael and virtualisation folks, is this the right way to move forward?
>
> Regards,
> Arnaud
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> >
> >> /* set up the receive buffers */
> >> for (i = 0; i < vrp->num_bufs / 2; i++) {
> >> struct scatterlist sg;
> >> @@ -983,9 +986,6 @@ static int rpmsg_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> >> */
> >> notify = virtqueue_kick_prepare(vrp->rvq);
> >>
> >> - /* From this point on, we can notify and get callbacks. */
> >> - virtio_device_ready(vdev);
> >> -
> >> /* tell the remote processor it can start sending messages */
> >> /*
> >> * this might be concurrent with callbacks, but we are only
> >> --
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
