Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Feb 2022 17:11:28 +0000 | From | Cristian Marussi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] firmware: arm_scmi: Add atomic mode support to virtio transport |
| |
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:07:59AM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 03:28:52PM +0100, Peter Hilber wrote: > > On 24.01.22 11:03, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > > Add support for .mark_txdone and .poll_done transport operations to SCMI > > > VirtIO transport as pre-requisites to enable atomic operations. > > > > > > Add a Kernel configuration option to enable SCMI VirtIO transport polling > > > and atomic mode for selected SCMI transactions while leaving it default > > > disabled. > > > > >
Hi Peter,
> > Hi Cristian, > > > > Hi Peter, > > > please see one remark below. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Peter > > > > > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Igor Skalkin <igor.skalkin@opensynergy.com> > > > Cc: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@opensynergy.com> > > > Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org > > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > > > --- > > [snip] > > > > +/** > > > + * virtio_poll_done - Provide polling support for VirtIO transport > > > + * > > > + * @cinfo: SCMI channel info > > > + * @xfer: Reference to the transfer being poll for. > > > + * > > > + * VirtIO core provides a polling mechanism based only on last used indexes: > > > + * this means that it is possible to poll the virtqueues waiting for something > > > + * new to arrive from the host side but the only way to check if the freshly > > > + * arrived buffer was what we were waiting for is to compare the newly arrived > > > + * message descriptors with the one we are polling on. > > > + * > > > + * As a consequence it can happen to dequeue something different from the buffer > > > + * we were poll-waiting for: if that is the case such early fetched buffers are > > > + * then added to a the @pending_cmds_list list for later processing by a > > > + * dedicated deferred worker. > > > + * > > > + * So, basically, once something new is spotted we proceed to de-queue all the > > > + * freshly received used buffers until we found the one we were polling on, or, > > > + * we have 'seemingly' emptied the virtqueue; if some buffers are still pending > > > + * in the vqueue at the end of the polling loop (possible due to inherent races > > > + * in virtqueues handling mechanisms), we similarly kick the deferred worker > > > + * and let it process those, to avoid indefinitely looping in the .poll_done > > > + * helper. > > > + * > > > + * Note that, since we do NOT have per-message suppress notification mechanism, > > > + * the message we are polling for could be delivered via usual IRQs callbacks > > > + * on another core which happened to have IRQs enabled: in such case it will be > > > + * handled as such by scmi_rx_callback() and the polling loop in the > > > + * SCMI Core TX path will be transparently terminated anyway. > > > + * > > > + * Return: True once polling has successfully completed. > > > + */ > > > +static bool virtio_poll_done(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, > > > + struct scmi_xfer *xfer) > > > +{ > > > + bool pending, ret = false; > > > + unsigned int length, any_prefetched = 0; > > > + unsigned long flags; > > > + struct scmi_vio_msg *next_msg, *msg = xfer->priv; > > > + struct scmi_vio_channel *vioch = cinfo->transport_info; > > > + > > > + if (!msg) > > > + return true; > > > + > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vioch->lock, flags); > > > > If now acquiring vioch->lock here, I see no need to virtqueue_poll() any more. > > After checking msg->poll_status, we could just directly try virtqueue_get_buf(). > > > > On the other hand, always taking the vioch->lock in a busy loop might better be > > avoided (I assumed before that taking it was omitted on purpose), since it > > might hamper tx channel progress in other cores (but I'm not sure about the > > actual impact). > > > > Also, I don't yet understand why the vioch->lock would need to be taken here. > > There was a race I could reproduce between the below check against > VIO_MSG_POLL_DONE and the poll_idx later update near the end of the poll loop > where another thread could have set VIO_MSG_POLL_DONE after this thread > had checked it and then this same thread would have cleared it rewriting > the new poll_idx; so at first I needlessly enlanrged the spinlocked section > (even though I knew was subtopimal given virtqueue_poll does not need > serialization) and then forget to properly review this thing. > > BUT now that, following your suggestion, I introduced a dedicated > poll_status that race is gone, so I shrinked back the spinlocked section > as before and works fine (even poll_idx itself does not need to be > protected really given it can be accessed only here) > > I'll post the fix in -rc2 together with the core change in the > virtio-core I proposed last week to Michael (if not too costly as perfs) >
Looking again at the polling support, beside the above fixes, I realized that also the handling of the virtqueue ready status was not addressed at all in polling mode, so I got rid of it and introduced a dedicated refcount mechanism that should serve the same purpose; moreover I shrinked a bit the main spinlocked areas introducing dedicated spinlocks for free_list and pending_lists. (and removed some redundant locks on msg...hopefully :P)
..and everuything still works apparently in my test scenario ... ( but .... you know... :P)
So just a heads up that the next series will include a couple of preparatory patches, and the core virtio_ring fix for the ABA problem, before the virtio polling one.
Thanks, Cristian
| |