qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v1 2/8] virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFI


From: Michael S. Tsirkin
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/8] virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 14:19:27 -0500

On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 12:45:13PM -0500, Jonah Palmer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/8/24 12:36 PM, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 6: 01 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@ redhat. com>
> > wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 02: 46: 06PM -0500, Jonah Palmer
> > wrote: > > Prevent ioeventfd from being enabled/disabled when a
> > virtio-pci > > device
> > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
> > This Message Is From an External Sender
> > This message came from outside your organization.
> > Report Suspicious
> > <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Op20OCZE8kFi__wOXJ_Z0URZ2e_9fdaYz2tejZvKqiDgOm6ijq_imUptzxsrej_4riwCrBGeKmQ9VKXqnbV1ujbfiOV5-E2e1s3pKqpqUL-gRIuMQLDLygRD1hoX3Q$>
> > ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 6:01 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 02:46:06PM -0500, Jonah Palmer wrote:
> > > > Prevent ioeventfd from being enabled/disabled when a virtio-pci
> > > > device has negotiated the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport
> > > > feature.
> > > >
> > > > Due to ioeventfd not being able to carry the extra data associated with
> > > > this feature, the ioeventfd should be left in a disabled state for
> > > > emulated virtio-pci devices using this feature.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonah Palmer <jonah.palmer@oracle.com>
> > > 
> > > I thought hard about this. I propose that for now,
> > > instead of disabling ioevetfd silently we error out unless
> > > user disabled it for us.
> > > WDYT?
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, error is a better plan than silently disabling it. In the
> > (unlikely?) case we are able to make notification data work with
> > eventfd in the future, it makes the change more evident.
> > 
> 
> Will do in v2. I assume we'll also make this the case for virtio-mmio and
> virtio-ccw?

Guess so. Pls note freeze is imminent.
> > > 
> > > > ---
> > > >  hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 6 ++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c
> > > > index d12edc567f..287b8f7720 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c
> > > > @@ -417,13 +417,15 @@ static void virtio_ioport_write(void *opaque, 
> > > > uint32_t addr, uint32_t val)
> > > >          }
> > > >          break;
> > > >      case VIRTIO_PCI_STATUS:
> > > > -        if (!(val & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK)) {
> > > > +        if (!(val & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK) &&
> > > > +            !virtio_vdev_has_feature(vdev, 
> > > > VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA)) {
> > > >              virtio_pci_stop_ioeventfd(proxy);
> > > >          }
> > > >
> > > >          virtio_set_status(vdev, val & 0xFF);
> > > >
> > > > -        if (val & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK) {
> > > > +        if ((val & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER_OK) &&
> > > > +            !virtio_vdev_has_feature(vdev, 
> > > > VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA)) {
> > > >              virtio_pci_start_ioeventfd(proxy);
> > > >          }
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.39.3
> > > 
> > 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]