On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:32:07AM +0100, Heinz Graalfs wrote:
> On 21/11/13 19:31, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 06:12:21PM +0100, Heinz Graalfs wrote:
> >>On 21/11/13 16:15, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:45:33PM +0100, Heinz Graalfs wrote:
> >>>>virtio_ccw's notify() callback for the common IO layer invokes
> >>>>virtio_driver's notify() callback to pass-on information to a
> >>>>backend driver if an online device disappeared.
> >>>>
> >>>>Signed-off-by: Heinz Graalfs <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>>simple question: is this serialized with device removal?
> >>>If this races with removal we have a problem.
> >>>
> >>
> >>notify and remove callbacks are not serialized.
> >>
> >>Additional processing in the notify handler is now locked by the queue lock.
> >>
> >>If remove is already active (e.g. driver unregister) and performing
> >>its cleanup (via virtblk_remove), we should definitely perform the
> >>(locked) request queue processing in notify (little later), because
> >>if a notify comes in, the device is GONE (not going away). Earlier
> >>triggered cleanup processing is about to fail anyway.
> >
> >I don't get it. It's possible nothing is in queue
> >or everything timed out.
> >Then this notify will address freed memory.
> >
> >I'm starting to think the right solution is to pass
> >a flag to remove: bool surprize_removal.
> >
> >Then you will cleanly set flags before removing the device.
> >
> >No new callbacks and no races.
>
> OK, I will send a v3 RFC.
>
> However, I suppose we will always have some kind of 'race' wrt this
> weird scenario, ending up in different kind of hang situations.
Handling surprise removal reliably is not easy.
WHQL has tests for this so it's doable if drivers are
programmed defencively.
> >
> >>>>---
> >>>> drivers/s390/kvm/virtio_ccw.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> >>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>>diff --git a/drivers/s390/kvm/virtio_ccw.c b/drivers/s390/kvm/virtio_ccw.c
> >>>>index 35b9aaa..682f688 100644
> >>>>--- a/drivers/s390/kvm/virtio_ccw.c
> >>>>+++ b/drivers/s390/kvm/virtio_ccw.c
> >>>>@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> >>>> #include <linux/module.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/io.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/kvm_para.h>
> >>>>+#include <linux/notifier.h>
> >>>> #include <asm/setup.h>
> >>>> #include <asm/irq.h>
> >>>> #include <asm/cio.h>
> >>>>@@ -1064,8 +1065,18 @@ out_free:
> >>>>
> >>>> static int virtio_ccw_cio_notify(struct ccw_device *cdev, int event)
> >>>> {
> >>>>- /* TODO: Check whether we need special handling here. */
> >>>>- return 0;
> >>>>+ int rc;
> >>>>+ struct virtio_ccw_device *vcdev = dev_get_drvdata(&cdev->dev);
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ switch (event) {
> >>>>+ case CIO_GONE:
> >>>>+ rc = notify_virtio_device(&vcdev->vdev, VDEV_GONE);
> >>>>+ break;
> >>>>+ default:
> >>>>+ rc = NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>>>+ break;
> >>>>+ }
> >>>>+ return rc;
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> static struct ccw_device_id virtio_ids[] = {
> >>>>--
> >>>>1.8.3.1
> >>>
> >
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
