Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH v4 04/12] spapr vfio: add vfio_container_spapr_get_info()

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 09/26/2013 06:29 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 20:11 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 09/11/2013 08:11 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 18:36 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>> On 09/06/2013 05:01 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 20:15 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>>> As sPAPR platform supports DMA windows on a PCI bus, the information
>>>>>> about their location and size should be passed into the guest via
>>>>>> the device tree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The patch adds a helper to read this info from the container fd.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Changes:
>>>>>> v4:
>>>>>> * fixed possible leaks on error paths
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  hw/misc/vfio.c         | 45 
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  include/hw/misc/vfio.h | 11 +++++++++++
>>>>>>  2 files changed, 56 insertions(+)
>>>>>>  create mode 100644 include/hw/misc/vfio.h
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/hw/misc/vfio.c b/hw/misc/vfio.c
>>>>>> index 53791fb..4210471 100644
>>>>>> --- a/hw/misc/vfio.c
>>>>>> +++ b/hw/misc/vfio.c
>>>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
>>>>>>  #include "qemu/range.h"
>>>>>>  #include "sysemu/kvm.h"
>>>>>>  #include "sysemu/sysemu.h"
>>>>>> +#include "hw/misc/vfio.h"
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  /* #define DEBUG_VFIO */
>>>>>>  #ifdef DEBUG_VFIO
>>>>>> @@ -3490,3 +3491,47 @@ static void register_vfio_pci_dev_type(void)
>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  type_init(register_vfio_pci_dev_type)
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +int vfio_container_spapr_get_info(AddressSpace *as, int32_t groupid,
>>>>>> +                                  struct vfio_iommu_spapr_tce_info 
>>>>>> *info,
>>>>>> +                                  int *group_fd)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +    VFIOAddressSpace *space;
>>>>>> +    VFIOGroup *group;
>>>>>> +    VFIOContainer *container;
>>>>>> +    int ret, fd;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    space = vfio_get_address_space(as);
>>>>>> +    if (!space) {
>>>>>> +        return -1;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +    group = vfio_get_group(groupid, space);
>>>>>> +    if (!group) {
>>>>>> +        goto put_as_exit;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +    container = group->container;
>>>>>> +    if (!group->container) {
>>>>>> +        goto put_group_exit;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +    fd = container->fd;
>>>>>> +    if (!ioctl(fd, VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION, VFIO_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU)) {
>>>>>> +        goto put_group_exit;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +    ret = ioctl(fd, VFIO_IOMMU_SPAPR_TCE_GET_INFO, info);
>>>>>> +    if (ret) {
>>>>>> +        error_report("vfio: failed to get iommu info for container: %s",
>>>>>> +                     strerror(errno));
>>>>>> +        goto put_group_exit;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +    *group_fd = group->fd;
>>>>>
>>>>> The above gets don't actually increment a reference count, so copying
>>>>> the fd seems risky here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If fd is gone while I am carrying it to my "external VFIO user" to call
>>>> kvmppc_vfio_group_get_external_user() on it, then the guest just shut
>>>> itself in a foot, no?
>>>> And I do not see how I would make it no risky, do you?
>>>
>>> We've handled the case in the kernel where the IOMMU code has a
>>> reference to the group so the group won't go away as long as that
>>> reference is in place, but we don't have that in QEMU.  If you supported
>>> hotplug, how would QEMU vfio notify spapr code to release the group?  I
>>> think you'd be left with the spapr kernel code holding the group
>>> reference and possibly a bogus file descriptor in QEMU if the group is
>>> close()'d and you've cached it from the above code.  Perhaps it's
>>> sufficient to note that you don't support hot remove, but do you
>>> actually do anything to prevent it?  Thanks,
>>
>>
>> I do not cache group_fd, I copy iе from VFIOGroup and immediately pass it
>> to KVM which immediately calls fget() on it. This is really short distance
>> and the only thing for protection here would be:
>>
>> -    *group_fd = group->fd;
>> +    *group_fd = dup(group->fd);
>>
>> and then close(group_fd) after I passed it to KVM. I guess it has to be
>> done anyway. But I suspect this is not what you are talking about...
> 
> Meanwhile each of the processors has executed several million
> instructions during this sequence of "immediate" events.  Besides, this
> just creates the interface, who uses it and how is outside of our
> control after this is in place.  Rather than creating an interface where
> you can ask for info, some of which may be closely tied to the lifecycle
> of a specific device, why not make an interface where vfio-pci can
> register and unregister information about a device as part of it's
> lifecycle?  That at least gives you an end point after which you know
> the data is no longer valid.  Thanks,

Sorry, I am not sure I understood you here.

As I understand the whole VFIO external API thing will move from spapr to
vfio so all I'll have to do will be just passing LIOBN to vfio so
vfio_container_spapr_get_info() will become
vfio_container_spapr_register_liobn_and_get_info() and no business with any
group fd. Is that correct?

Anyway it would be useful to see any rough QEMU patch or some git tree with
it. Thanks!





> 
> Alex
> 
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +put_group_exit:
>>>>>> +    vfio_put_group(group);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +put_as_exit:
>>>>>> +    vfio_put_address_space(space);
>>>>>
>>>>> But put_group calls disconnect_container which calls
>>>>> put_address_space... so it get's put twice.  The lack of symmetry
>>>>> already bites us with a bug.
>>>>
>>>> True. This will be fixed by moving vfio_get_address_space() into
>>>> vfio_get_group().
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Alexey