On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 06:52:34PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote: > On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 17:52:02 +0800, Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 17:50:46 +0800, Su Hui <suhui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 2023/10/23 13:46, Xuan Zhuo wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> Well, what are the cases where it can happen practically? > > > >>>>>>> Device error. Such as vp_active_vq() > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>>>> Hmm interesting. OK. But do callers know to recover? > > > >>>>> No. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> So I think WARN + broken is suitable. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks. > > > >>>> Sorry for the late, is the following code okay? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> @@ -2739,7 +2739,7 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num, > > > >>>> void (*recycle)(struct virtqueue *vq, void *buf)) > > > >>>> { > > > >>>> struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq); > > > >>>> - int err; > > > >>>> + int err, err_reset; > > > >>>> > > > >>>> if (num > vq->vq.num_max) > > > >>>> return -E2BIG; > > > >>>> @@ -2759,7 +2759,15 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num, > > > >>>> else > > > >>>> err = virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num); > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - return virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq); > > > >>>> + err_reset = virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq); > > > >>>> + > > > >>>> + if (err) { > > > >>> No err. > > > >>> > > > >>> err is not important. > > > >>> You can remove that. > > > >> Emm, I'm a little confused that which code should I remove ? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> like this: > > > >> if (vq->packed_ring) > > > >> virtqueue_resize_packed(_vq, num); > > > >> else > > > >> virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num); > > > >> > > > >> And we should set broken and warn inside virtqueue_enable_after_reset()? > > > > > > In my opinion, we should return the error code of virtqueue_resize_packed() / virtqueue_resize_split(). > > > But if this err is not important, this patch makes no sense. > > > Maybe I misunderstand somewhere... > > > If you think it's worth sending a patch, you can send it :).(I'm not familiar with this code). > > > > OK. > > Hi Michael, > > The queue reset code is wrote with the CONFIG_VIRTIO_HARDEN_NOTIFICATION. > > When we disable the vq, the broken is true until we re-enable it. > > So when we re-enable it fail, the vq is broken status. > > Normally, this just happens on the buggy device. > So I think that is enough. > > Thanks. I don't know what to do about CONFIG_VIRTIO_HARDEN_NOTIFICATION. It's known to be broken and it does not look like there's active effort to revive it - should we just drop it for now? > > static int vp_modern_disable_vq_and_reset(struct virtqueue *vq) > { > [...] > > vp_modern_set_queue_reset(mdev, vq->index); > > [...] > > #ifdef CONFIG_VIRTIO_HARDEN_NOTIFICATION > ->> __virtqueue_break(vq); > #endif > > [...] > } > > static int vp_modern_enable_vq_after_reset(struct virtqueue *vq) > { > [...] > > if (vp_modern_get_queue_reset(mdev, index)) > return -EBUSY; > > if (vp_modern_get_queue_enable(mdev, index)) > return -EBUSY; > > err = vp_active_vq(vq, info->msix_vector); > if (err) > return err; > > } > > [...] > > #ifdef CONFIG_VIRTIO_HARDEN_NOTIFICATION > ->> __virtqueue_unbreak(vq); > #endif > > [...] > } > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Su Hui > > > _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization