On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 3:41 PM Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> (1) The virtio-1.2 specification
> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.2/virtio-v1.2.html> writes:
>
> > 3 General Initialization And Device Operation
> > 3.1 Device Initialization
> > 3.1.1 Driver Requirements: Device Initialization
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > 7. Perform device-specific setup, including discovery of virtqueues for
> > the device, optional per-bus setup, reading and possibly writing the
> > device’s virtio configuration space, and population of virtqueues.
> >
> > 8. Set the DRIVER_OK status bit. At this point the device is “live”.
>
> and
>
> > 4 Virtio Transport Options
> > 4.1 Virtio Over PCI Bus
> > 4.1.4 Virtio Structure PCI Capabilities
> > 4.1.4.3 Common configuration structure layout
> > 4.1.4.3.2 Driver Requirements: Common configuration structure layout
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > The driver MUST configure the other virtqueue fields before enabling the
> > virtqueue with queue_enable.
> >
> > [...]
>
> (The same statements are present in virtio-1.0 identically, at
> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.0/virtio-v1.0.html>.)
>
> These together mean that the following sub-sequence of steps is valid for
> a virtio-1.0 guest driver:
>
> (1.1) set "queue_enable" for the needed queues as the final part of device
> initialization step (7),
>
> (1.2) set DRIVER_OK in step (8),
>
> (1.3) immediately start sending virtio requests to the device.
>
> (2) When vhost-user is enabled, and the VHOST_USER_F_PROTOCOL_FEATURES
> special virtio feature is negotiated, then virtio rings start in disabled
> state, according to
> <https://qemu-project.gitlab.io/qemu/interop/vhost-user.html#ring-states>.
> In this case, explicit VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE messages are needed for
> enabling vrings.
>
> Therefore setting "queue_enable" from the guest (1.1) is a *control plane*
> operation, which travels from the guest through QEMU to the vhost-user
> backend, using a unix domain socket.
>
The code looks good to me, but this part of the message is not precise
if I understood it correctly.
Guest PCI "queue_enable" writes remain in the qemu virtio device model
until the guest writes DRIVER_OK to the status. I'm referring to
hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c:virtio_pci_common_write, case
VIRTIO_PCI_COMMON_Q_ENABLE. From there, virtio_queue_enable just saves
the info in VirtIOPCIProxy.
After the needed queues are enabled, the guest writes DRIVER_OK status
bit. Then, the vhost backend is started and qemu sends the
VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE through the unix socket. And that is the
source of the message that is racing with the dataplane.
I didn't confirm it with virtiofs through tracing / debugging, so I
may be missing something.
Even with the small nit, the code fixes the problem.
Acked-by: Eugenio Pérez <epere...@redhat.com>
> Whereas sending a virtio request (1.3) is a *data plane* operation, which
> evades QEMU -- it travels from guest to the vhost-user backend via
> eventfd.
>
> This means that steps (1.1) and (1.3) travel through different channels,
> and their relative order can be reversed, as perceived by the vhost-user
> backend.
>
> That's exactly what happens when OVMF's virtiofs driver (VirtioFsDxe) runs
> against the Rust-language virtiofsd version 1.7.2. (Which uses version
> 0.10.1 of the vhost-user-backend crate, and version 0.8.1 of the vhost
> crate.)
>
> Namely, when VirtioFsDxe binds a virtiofs device, it goes through the
> device initialization steps (i.e., control plane operations), and
> immediately sends a FUSE_INIT request too (i.e., performs a data plane
> operation). In the Rust-language virtiofsd, this creates a race between
> two components that run *concurrently*, i.e., in different threads or
> processes:
>
> - Control plane, handling vhost-user protocol messages:
>
> The "VhostUserSlaveReqHandlerMut::set_vring_enable" method
> [crates/vhost-user-backend/src/handler.rs] handles
> VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE messages, and updates each vring's "enabled"
> flag according to the message processed.
>
> - Data plane, handling virtio / FUSE requests:
>
> The "VringEpollHandler::handle_event" method
> [crates/vhost-user-backend/src/event_loop.rs] handles the incoming
> virtio / FUSE request, consuming the virtio kick at the same time. If
> the vring's "enabled" flag is set, the virtio / FUSE request is
> processed genuinely. If the vring's "enabled" flag is clear, then the
> virtio / FUSE request is discarded.
>
> Note that OVMF enables the queue *first*, and sends FUSE_INIT *second*.
> However, if the data plane processor in virtiofsd wins the race, then it
> sees the FUSE_INIT *before* the control plane processor took notice of
> VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE and green-lit the queue for the data plane
> processor. Therefore the latter drops FUSE_INIT on the floor, and goes
> back to waiting for further virtio / FUSE requests with epoll_wait.
> Meanwhile OVMF is stuck waiting for the FUSET_INIT response -- a deadlock.
>
> The deadlock is not deterministic. OVMF hangs infrequently during first
> boot. However, OVMF hangs almost certainly during reboots from the UEFI
> shell.
>
> The race can be "reliably masked" by inserting a very small delay -- a
> single debug message -- at the top of "VringEpollHandler::handle_event",
> i.e., just before the data plane processor checks the "enabled" field of
> the vring. That delay suffices for the control plane processor to act upon
> VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE.
>
> We can deterministically prevent the race in QEMU, by blocking OVMF inside
> step (1.1) -- i.e., in the write to the "queue_enable" register -- until
> VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE actually *completes*. That way OVMF's VCPU
> cannot advance to the FUSE_INIT submission before virtiofsd's control
> plane processor takes notice of the queue being enabled.
>
> Wait for VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE completion by:
>
> - setting the NEED_REPLY flag on VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, and waiting
> for the reply, if the VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_ACK vhost-user feature
> has been negotiated, or
>
> - performing a separate VHOST_USER_GET_FEATURES *exchange*, which requires
> a backend response regardless of VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_ACK.
>
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> (supporter:vhost)
> Cc: Eugenio Perez Martin <epere...@redhat.com>
> Cc: German Maglione <gmagli...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Liu Jiang <ge...@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: Sergio Lopez Pascual <s...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> v2:
>
> - pick up R-b from Stefano
>
> - update virtio spec reference from 1.0 to 1.2 (also keep the 1.0 ref)
> in the commit message; re-check the quotes / section headers [Stefano]
>
> - summarize commit message in code comment [Stefano]
>
> hw/virtio/vhost-user.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> index 18e15a9bb359..41842eb023b5 100644
> --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
> @@ -1235,7 +1235,21 @@ static int vhost_user_set_vring_enable(struct
> vhost_dev *dev, int enable)
> .num = enable,
> };
>
> - ret = vhost_set_vring(dev, VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, &state,
> false);
> + /*
> + * SET_VRING_ENABLE travels from guest to QEMU to vhost-user backend
> /
> + * control plane thread via unix domain socket. Virtio requests
> travel
> + * from guest to vhost-user backend / data plane thread via eventfd.
> + * Even if the guest enables the ring first, and pushes its first
> virtio
> + * request second (conforming to the virtio spec), the data plane
> thread
> + * in the backend may see the virtio request before the control plane
> + * thread sees the queue enablement. This causes (in fact, requires)
> the
> + * data plane thread to discard the virtio request (it arrived on a
> + * seemingly disabled queue). To prevent this out-of-order delivery,
> + * don't let the guest proceed to pushing the virtio request until
> the
> + * backend control plane acknowledges enabling the queue -- IOW, pass
> + * wait_for_reply=true below.
> + */
> + ret = vhost_set_vring(dev, VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, &state,
> true);
> if (ret < 0) {
> /*
> * Restoring the previous state is likely infeasible, as well as
