| Message ID | 20210920230202.1439-8-longpeng2@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | optimize the downtime for vfio migration | expand |
On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 07:02:00 +0800 "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com> wrote: > 'defer_kvm_irq_routing' indicates whether we should defer to commit > the kvm routing. > > Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@huawei.com> > --- > hw/vfio/pci.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > hw/vfio/pci.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c > index 8e97ca93cf..8fe238b11d 100644 > --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c > +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c > @@ -423,12 +423,24 @@ static void vfio_add_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev, VFIOMSIVector *vector, > return; > } > > - virq = kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, &vdev->pdev); > + virq = kvm_irqchip_add_deferred_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, &vdev->pdev); > if (virq < 0) { > event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); > return; > } > > + if (vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing) { > + /* > + * Hold the allocated virq in vector->virq temporarily, will > + * reset it to -1 when we fail to add the corresponding irqfd > + * in vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(). s/when/if/ > + */ > + vector->virq = virq; Do we need to make this unique to the deferred case or could we use vector->virq directly and fill it with -1 on all error paths like we do on a failure in vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq()? > + return; > + } > + > + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); > + > if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, &vector->kvm_interrupt, > NULL, virq) < 0) { > kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, virq); > @@ -567,6 +579,35 @@ static void vfio_msix_vector_release(PCIDevice *pdev, unsigned int nr) > } > } > > +/* TODO: invoked when enclabe msi/msix vectors */ "enclabe"? Is this meant to be "enable"? > +static __attribute__((unused)) void vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev) I'd move this function, if not this entire change, to patch 9 rather than adding these attributes for an unused function. Thanks, Alex > +{ > + int i; > + VFIOMSIVector *vector; > + > + if (!vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing || !vdev->nr_vectors) { > + return; > + } > + > + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); > + > + for (i = 0; i < vdev->nr_vectors; i++) { > + vector = &vdev->msi_vectors[i]; > + > + if (!vector->use || vector->virq < 0) { > + continue; > + } > + > + if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, > + &vector->kvm_interrupt, > + NULL, vector->virq) < 0) { > + kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, vector->virq); > + event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); > + vector->virq = -1; > + } > + } > +} > + > static void vfio_msix_enable(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev) > { > PCIDevice *pdev = &vdev->pdev; > diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.h b/hw/vfio/pci.h > index 64777516d1..d3c5177d37 100644 > --- a/hw/vfio/pci.h > +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.h > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ struct VFIOPCIDevice { > bool no_kvm_ioeventfd; > bool no_vfio_ioeventfd; > bool enable_ramfb; > + bool defer_kvm_irq_routing; > VFIODisplay *dpy; > Notifier irqchip_change_notifier; > };
> -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Williamson [mailto:alex.williamson@redhat.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2021 7:05 AM > To: Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.) > <longpeng2@huawei.com> > Cc: philmd@redhat.com; pbonzini@redhat.com; marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com; > mst@redhat.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Gonglei (Arei) > <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>; chenjiashang <chenjiashang@huawei.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/9] vfio: add infrastructure to commit the deferred kvm > routing > > On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 07:02:00 +0800 > "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com> wrote: > > > 'defer_kvm_irq_routing' indicates whether we should defer to commit > > the kvm routing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@huawei.com> > > --- > > hw/vfio/pci.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > hw/vfio/pci.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c > > index 8e97ca93cf..8fe238b11d 100644 > > --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c > > +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c > > @@ -423,12 +423,24 @@ static void vfio_add_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev, > VFIOMSIVector *vector, > > return; > > } > > > > - virq = kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, &vdev->pdev); > > + virq = kvm_irqchip_add_deferred_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, > &vdev->pdev); > > if (virq < 0) { > > event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); > > return; > > } > > > > + if (vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing) { > > + /* > > + * Hold the allocated virq in vector->virq temporarily, will > > + * reset it to -1 when we fail to add the corresponding irqfd > > + * in vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(). > > s/when/if/ > OK, thanks. > > + */ > > + vector->virq = virq; > > Do we need to make this unique to the deferred case or could we use > vector->virq directly and fill it with -1 on all error paths like we do > on a failure in vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq()? > OK, I will use vector->irq directly, it looks neater. > > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); > > + > > if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, > &vector->kvm_interrupt, > > NULL, virq) < 0) { > > kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, virq); > > @@ -567,6 +579,35 @@ static void vfio_msix_vector_release(PCIDevice *pdev, > unsigned int nr) > > } > > } > > > > +/* TODO: invoked when enclabe msi/msix vectors */ > > "enclabe"? Is this meant to be "enable"? > Yes, it's a typo. > > +static __attribute__((unused)) void vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice > *vdev) > > I'd move this function, if not this entire change, to patch 9 rather > than adding these attributes for an unused function. Thanks, > OK. I think I should merge this patch into patch 9 entirely if we decide to move this function. > Alex > > > +{ > > + int i; > > + VFIOMSIVector *vector; > > + > > + if (!vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing || !vdev->nr_vectors) { > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < vdev->nr_vectors; i++) { > > + vector = &vdev->msi_vectors[i]; > > + > > + if (!vector->use || vector->virq < 0) { > > + continue; > > + } > > + > > + if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, > > + &vector->kvm_interrupt, > > + NULL, vector->virq) < 0) { > > + kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, vector->virq); > > + event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); > > + vector->virq = -1; > > + } > > + } > > +} > > + > > static void vfio_msix_enable(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev) > > { > > PCIDevice *pdev = &vdev->pdev; > > diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.h b/hw/vfio/pci.h > > index 64777516d1..d3c5177d37 100644 > > --- a/hw/vfio/pci.h > > +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.h > > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ struct VFIOPCIDevice { > > bool no_kvm_ioeventfd; > > bool no_vfio_ioeventfd; > > bool enable_ramfb; > > + bool defer_kvm_irq_routing; > > VFIODisplay *dpy; > > Notifier irqchip_change_notifier; > > };
diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c index 8e97ca93cf..8fe238b11d 100644 --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c @@ -423,12 +423,24 @@ static void vfio_add_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev, VFIOMSIVector *vector, return; } - virq = kvm_irqchip_add_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, &vdev->pdev); + virq = kvm_irqchip_add_deferred_msi_route(kvm_state, vector_n, &vdev->pdev); if (virq < 0) { event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); return; } + if (vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing) { + /* + * Hold the allocated virq in vector->virq temporarily, will + * reset it to -1 when we fail to add the corresponding irqfd + * in vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(). + */ + vector->virq = virq; + return; + } + + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); + if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, &vector->kvm_interrupt, NULL, virq) < 0) { kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, virq); @@ -567,6 +579,35 @@ static void vfio_msix_vector_release(PCIDevice *pdev, unsigned int nr) } } +/* TODO: invoked when enclabe msi/msix vectors */ +static __attribute__((unused)) void vfio_commit_kvm_msi_virq(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev) +{ + int i; + VFIOMSIVector *vector; + + if (!vdev->defer_kvm_irq_routing || !vdev->nr_vectors) { + return; + } + + kvm_irqchip_commit_routes(kvm_state); + + for (i = 0; i < vdev->nr_vectors; i++) { + vector = &vdev->msi_vectors[i]; + + if (!vector->use || vector->virq < 0) { + continue; + } + + if (kvm_irqchip_add_irqfd_notifier_gsi(kvm_state, + &vector->kvm_interrupt, + NULL, vector->virq) < 0) { + kvm_irqchip_release_virq(kvm_state, vector->virq); + event_notifier_cleanup(&vector->kvm_interrupt); + vector->virq = -1; + } + } +} + static void vfio_msix_enable(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev) { PCIDevice *pdev = &vdev->pdev; diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.h b/hw/vfio/pci.h index 64777516d1..d3c5177d37 100644 --- a/hw/vfio/pci.h +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.h @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ struct VFIOPCIDevice { bool no_kvm_ioeventfd; bool no_vfio_ioeventfd; bool enable_ramfb; + bool defer_kvm_irq_routing; VFIODisplay *dpy; Notifier irqchip_change_notifier; };
'defer_kvm_irq_routing' indicates whether we should defer to commit the kvm routing. Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@huawei.com> --- hw/vfio/pci.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- hw/vfio/pci.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)