Hi Danylo,
On 6/4/25 10:32 AM, Danylo Vodopianov wrote:
Hello, Maxime
Thank you for your review.
If I understand correctly, you propose modifying the |
VHOST_USER_ASSERT_LOCK()| macro so that a |VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE|
request does not trigger an assertion.
However, I believe such modification would not be appropriate, as it
would revert the logic introduced in commit |5e8fcc60b59d| ("vhost:
enhance virtqueue access lock asserts"). With this approach, we would be
performing memory hotplug without queue locking, which could lead to
unintended consequences.
Regarding VDPA device regression. We faced with this issue when we
request the number of lcores that the default amount of memory on the
socket cannot handle it.
So, regression occurred during the startup part, during device
configuration when it creates pkt mbuf pool.
Let me know your thoughts regarding this.
No, my point was to modify VHOST_USER_ASSERT_LOCK() to no trigger an
assertion in case vDPA is configured, as we don't want to lock in this
case.
Regards,
Maxime
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*От:* Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com>
*Отправлено:* 3 июня 2025 г. 15:30
*Кому:* Danylo Vodopianov <dvo-...@napatech.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
<tho...@monjalon.net>; aman.deep.si...@intel.com
<aman.deep.si...@intel.com>; yuying.zh...@intel.com
<yuying.zh...@intel.com>; or...@nvidia.com <or...@nvidia.com>;
mcoqu...@redhat.com <mcoqu...@redhat.com>; Christian Koue Muf
<c...@napatech.com>; ma...@mellanox.com <ma...@mellanox.com>;
david.march...@redhat.com <david.march...@redhat.com>; Mykola Kostenok
<mko-...@napatech.com>; Serhii Iliushyk <sil-...@napatech.com>
*Копия:* step...@networkplumber.org <step...@networkplumber.org>;
dev@dpdk.org <dev@dpdk.org>; Chenbo Xia <chen...@nvidia.com>
*Тема:* Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] vhost: handle virtqueue locking for memory
hotplug
Hello Danylo,
On 6/2/25 10:50 AM, Danylo Vodopianov wrote:
For vDPA devices, virtqueues are not locked once the device has been
configured. In the
commit 5e8fcc60b59d ("vhost: enhance virtqueue access lock asserts"),
the asserts were enhanced to trigger rte_panic functionality, preventing
access to virtqueues without locking. However, this change introduced
an issue where the memory hotplug mechanism, added in the
commit 127f9c6f7b78 ("vhost: handle memory hotplug with vDPA devices"),
no longer works. Since it expects for all queues are locked.
During the initialization of a vDPA device, the driver sets the
VIRTIO_DEV_VDPA_CONFIGURED flag, which prevents the
vhost_user_lock_all_queue_pairs function from locking the
virtqueues. This leads to the error: the VIRTIO_DEV_VDPA_CONFIGURED
flag allows the use of the hotplug mechanism, but it fails
because the virtqueues are not locked, while it expects to be locked
for VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE in the table VHOST_MESSAGE_HANDLERS.
This patch addresses the issue by enhancing the conditional statement
to include a new condition. Specifically, when the device receives the
VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE request, the virtqueues are locked to update
the basic configurations and hotplug the guest memory.
This fix does not impact access lock when vDPA driver is configured
for other unnecessary message handlers.
Manual memory configuring with "--socket-mem" option allows to avoid
hotplug mechanism using.
s/using/use/
It needs a fixes tag, and sta...@dpdk.org should be cc'ed, so that it
gets backported to LTS branches.
Signed-off-by: Danylo Vodopianov <dvo-...@napatech.com>
---
lib/vhost/vhost_user.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/vhost/vhost_user.c b/lib/vhost/vhost_user.c
index ec950acf97..16d03e1033 100644
--- a/lib/vhost/vhost_user.c
+++ b/lib/vhost/vhost_user.c
@@ -3178,7 +3178,13 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd)
* would cause a dead lock.
*/
if (msg_handler != NULL && msg_handler->lock_all_qps) {
- if (!(dev->flags & VIRTIO_DEV_VDPA_CONFIGURED)) {
+ /* Lock all queue pairs if the device is not configured for vDPA,
+ * or if it is configured for vDPA but the request is
VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE.
+ * This ensures proper queue locking for memory table updates and
guest
+ * memory hotplug.
+ */
+ if (!(dev->flags & VIRTIO_DEV_VDPA_CONFIGURED) ||
+ request == VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE) {
It looks like a workaround, and I'm afraid it could cause regression
with some vDPA devices, or that it would not be enough and we would have
to add other requests as exception.
Wouldn't it better to modify VHOST_USER_ASSERT_LOCK() so that it takes
into account the VIRTIO_DEV_VDPA_CONFIGURED flag?
Thanks,
Maxime
vhost_user_lock_all_queue_pairs(dev);
unlock_required = 1;
}
