On Wed, 2022-06-01 at 15:37 +0000, Benjamin Beichler wrote:
> If VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_INBAND_NOTIFICATIONS is activated, the user mode
> linux virtio irq handler only read one msg from the corresponding socket.
> This creates issues, when the device emulation creates multiple call
> requests (e.g. for multiple virtqueues), as the socket buffer tend to fill
> up and the call requests are delayed.
>
> This creates a deadlock situation, when the device simulation blocks,
> because of sending a msg and the kernel side blocks because of
> synchronously waiting for an acknowledge of kick request.
>
> Actually inband notifications are meant to be used in combination with the
> time travel protocol, but it is not required, therefore this corner case
> needs to be handled.
Hmm. How did you run into this? Why would a device send many messages
and not wait for ACK, but the kernel side actually waits for ACK? What
would the use case for that be? Seems a bit odd, if both wait for ACK
there shouldn't be an issue?
Anyway, I guess I don't mind fixing this regardless of whether I see a
use case where it could happen :-)
> +++ b/arch/um/drivers/virtio_uml.c
> @@ -363,45 +363,47 @@ static irqreturn_t vu_req_read_message(struct
> virtio_uml_device *vu_dev,
> struct vhost_user_msg msg;
> u8 extra_payload[512];
> } msg;
> - int rc;
> -
> - rc = vhost_user_recv_req(vu_dev, &msg.msg,
> - sizeof(msg.msg.payload) +
> - sizeof(msg.extra_payload));
> -
> - if (rc)
This code changed a bit, you should rebase onto the uml tree's for-next
branch.
> + while (1) {
> + if (vhost_user_recv_req(vu_dev, &msg.msg,
> + sizeof(msg.msg.payload)
> + + sizeof(msg.extra_payload)))
prefer to keep the + on the previous line.
That said, my attempt at rebasing this made it all fail completely,
maybe you have better luck :)
johannes
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
