qemu-stable
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Move net backend cleanup to NIC cleanup


From: Michael Tokarev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Move net backend cleanup to NIC cleanup
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:01:25 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

12.09.2024 19:54, Eugenio Pérez wrote:
Commit a0d7215e33 ("vhost-vdpa: do not cleanup the vdpa/vhost-net
structures if peer nic is present") effectively delayed the backend
cleanup, allowing the frontend or the guest to access it resources as
long as the frontend NIC is still visible to the guest.

However it does not clean up the resources until the qemu process is
over.  This causes an effective leak if the device is deleted with
device_del, as there is no way to close the vdpa device.  This makes
impossible to re-add that device to this or other QEMU instances until
the first instance of QEMU is finished.

Move the cleanup from qemu_cleanup to the NIC deletion.

v2:
Remove NIC peer also at net_cleanup. vhost-user trust all the
backends are clean before qemu removes char devices.

This is not a requisite introduced by this commit as
system/runstate.c:qemu_cleanup shows.

Eugenio Pérez (2):
   net: parameterize the removing client from nc list
   net: move backend cleanup to NIC cleanup

  net/net.c        | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
  net/vhost-vdpa.c |  8 --------
  2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
Hi!

It looks like this series has been forgotten.  Is it still needed?

In order for it to build, a single line in patch 2 needs to be
changed (in net_cleanup()), from:

+                for (int i = 0; i < queues; i++) {
+                    NetClientState *nc = qemu_get_subqueue(nic, i);
+                    qemu_cleanup_net_client(nc->peer, false);
+                }

to

+                for (int i = 0; i < queues; i++) {
+                    nc = qemu_get_subqueue(nic, i);
+                    qemu_cleanup_net_client(nc->peer, false);
+                }

so there's no variable shadowing anymore.

Should this series be resent (a v3), or can this be fixed at apply time?

Thanks,



reply via email to

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