On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 11:49:10PM +0800, Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.) wrote:
在 2022/11/11 23:14, Stefano Garzarella 写道:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 10:55:05PM +0800, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
From: Longpeng <longpeng2@xxxxxxxxxx>
1. We should not set status to 0 when invoking vp_vdpa_set_status().
2. The driver MUST wait for a read of device_status to return 0 before
reinitializing the device.
Signed-off-by: Longpeng <longpeng2@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
b/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
index d448db0c4de3..d35fac5cde11 100644
--- a/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
+++ b/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
@@ -212,8 +212,12 @@ static void vp_vdpa_set_status(struct
vdpa_device *vdpa, u8 status)
{
struct vp_vdpa *vp_vdpa = vdpa_to_vp(vdpa);
struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev = vp_vdpa_to_mdev(vp_vdpa);
- u8 s = vp_vdpa_get_status(vdpa);
Is this change really needed?
No need to get the status if we try to set status to 0 (trigger BUG).
Okay, but that's the case that should never happen, so IMHO we can leave
it as it is.
+ u8 s;
+
+ /* We should never be setting status to 0. */
+ BUG_ON(status == 0);
IMHO panicking the kernel seems excessive in this case, please use
WARN_ON and maybe return earlier.
Um...I referenced the vp_reset/vp_set_status,
Ah I see, maybe it's an old code, because recently we always try to
avoid BUG_ON().
+ s = vp_vdpa_get_status(vdpa);
if (status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK &&
!(s & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK)) {
vp_vdpa_request_irq(vp_vdpa);
@@ -229,6 +233,11 @@ static int vp_vdpa_reset(struct vdpa_device *vdpa)
u8 s = vp_vdpa_get_status(vdpa);
vp_modern_set_status(mdev, 0);
+ /* After writing 0 to device_status, the driver MUST wait for
a read of
+ * device_status to return 0 before reinitializing the device.
+ */
+ while (vp_modern_get_status(mdev))
+ msleep(1);
Should we set a limit after which we give up? A malfunctioning
device could keep us here forever.
Yes, but the malfunctioning device maybe can not work anymore, how to
handle it?
Maybe we should set the status to broken, but in this case we could just
return an error if we couldn't reset it, how about that?
Thanks,
Stefano
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
