On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 03:09:43AM -0700, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
>
>
> On 7/27/2022 2:01 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 12:50:33AM -0700, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On 7/26/2022 11:01 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 03:47:35AM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > > > From: Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 10:53 PM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 7/27/2022 10:17 AM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 10:15 PM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 7/26/2022 11:56 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > From: Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 11:46 PM
> > > > > > > > > > > When the user space which invokes netlink commands, detects that
> > > > > > > > _MQ
> > > > > > > > > > is not supported, hence it takes max_queue_pair = 1 by itself.
> > > > > > > > > > I think the kernel module have all necessary information and it is
> > > > > > > > > > the only one which have precise information of a device, so it
> > > > > > > > > > should answer precisely than let the user space guess. The kernel
> > > > > > > > > > module should be reliable than stay silent, leave the question to
> > > > > > > > > > the user space
> > > > > > > > tool.
> > > > > > > > > Kernel is reliable. It doesn’t expose a config space field if the
> > > > > > > > > field doesn’t
> > > > > > > > exist regardless of field should have default or no default.
> > > > > > > > so when you know it is one queue pair, you should answer one, not try
> > > > > > > > to guess.
> > > > > > > > > User space should not guess either. User space gets to see if _MQ
> > > > > > > > present/not present. If _MQ present than get reliable data from kernel.
> > > > > > > > > If _MQ not present, it means this device has one VQ pair.
> > > > > > > > it is still a guess, right? And all user space tools implemented this
> > > > > > > > feature need to guess
> > > > > > > No. it is not a guess.
> > > > > > > It is explicitly checking the _MQ feature and deriving the value.
> > > > > > > The code you proposed will be present in the user space.
> > > > > > > It will be uniform for _MQ and 10 other features that are present now and
> > > > > > in the future.
> > > > > > MQ and other features like RSS are different. If there is no _RSS_XX, there
> > > > > > are no attributes like max_rss_key_size, and there is not a default value.
> > > > > > But for MQ, we know it has to be 1 wihtout _MQ.
> > > > > "we" = user space.
> > > > > To keep the consistency among all the config space fields.
> > > > Actually I looked and the code some more and I'm puzzled:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > struct virtio_net_config config = {};
> > > > u64 features;
> > > > u16 val_u16;
> > > >
> > > > vdpa_get_config_unlocked(vdev, 0, &config, sizeof(config));
> > > >
> > > > if (nla_put(msg, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_NET_CFG_MACADDR, sizeof(config.mac),
> > > > config.mac))
> > > > return -EMSGSIZE;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mac returned even without VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > val_u16 = le16_to_cpu(config.status);
> > > > if (nla_put_u16(msg, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_NET_STATUS, val_u16))
> > > > return -EMSGSIZE;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > status returned even without VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS
> > > >
> > > > val_u16 = le16_to_cpu(config.mtu);
> > > > if (nla_put_u16(msg, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_NET_CFG_MTU, val_u16))
> > > > return -EMSGSIZE;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > MTU returned even without VIRTIO_NET_F_MTU
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What's going on here?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I guess this is spec thing (historical debt), I vaguely recall these fields
> > > are always present in config space regardless the existence of corresponding
> > > feature bit.
> > >
> > > -Siwei
> > Nope:
> >
> > 2.5.1 Driver Requirements: Device Configuration Space
> >
> > ...
> >
> > For optional configuration space fields, the driver MUST check that the corresponding feature is offered
> > before accessing that part of the configuration space.
> Well, this is driver side of requirement.
Well driver and device are the only two entities in the spec.
> As this interface is for host
> admin tool to query or configure vdpa device, we don't have to wait until
> feature negotiation is done on guest driver to extract vdpa
> attributes/parameters, say if we want to replicate another vdpa device with
> the same config on migration destination. I think what may need to be fix is
> to move off from using .vdpa_get_config_unlocked() which depends on feature
> negotiation. And/or expose config space register values through another set
> of attributes.
>
> -Siwei
>
>
Sounds like something that might use the proposed admin queue maybe.
Hope that makes progress ...
--
MST
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
