On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 05:49:23PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote: > The issue is reported by Yihuang Yu who have 'netperf' test on > NVidia's grace-grace and grace-hopper machines. The 'netperf' > client is started in the VM hosted by grace-hopper machine, > while the 'netperf' server is running on grace-grace machine. > > The VM is started with virtio-net and vhost has been enabled. > We observe a error message spew from VM and then soft-lockup > report. The error message indicates the data associated with > the descriptor (index: 135) has been released, and the queue > is marked as broken. It eventually leads to the endless effort > to fetch free buffer (skb) in drivers/net/virtio_net.c::start_xmit() > and soft-lockup. The stale index 135 is fetched from the available > ring and published to the used ring by vhost, meaning we have > disordred write to the available ring element and available index. > > /home/gavin/sandbox/qemu.main/build/qemu-system-aarch64 \ > -accel kvm -machine virt,gic-version=host \ > : \ > -netdev tap,id=vnet0,vhost=on \ > -device virtio-net-pci,bus=pcie.8,netdev=vnet0,mac=52:54:00:f1:26:b0 \ > > [ 19.993158] virtio_net virtio1: output.0:id 135 is not a head! > > Fix the issue by replacing virtio_wmb(vq->weak_barriers) with stronger > virtio_mb(false), equivalent to replaced 'dmb' by 'dsb' instruction on > ARM64. It should work for other architectures, but performance loss is > expected. > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Reported-by: Yihuang Yu <yihyu@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > index 49299b1f9ec7..7d852811c912 100644 > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > @@ -687,9 +687,15 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_split(struct virtqueue *_vq, > avail = vq->split.avail_idx_shadow & (vq->split.vring.num - 1); > vq->split.vring.avail->ring[avail] = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, head); > > - /* Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose the > - * new available array entries. */ > - virtio_wmb(vq->weak_barriers); > + /* > + * Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose > + * the new available array entries. virtio_wmb() should be enough > + * to ensuere the order theoretically. However, a stronger barrier > + * is needed by ARM64. Otherwise, the stale data can be observed > + * by the host (vhost). A stronger barrier should work for other > + * architectures, but performance loss is expected. > + */ > + virtio_mb(false); I don't get what is going on here. Any explanation why virtio_wmb is not enough besides "it does not work"? > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow++; > vq->split.vring.avail->idx = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow); > -- > 2.44.0
