Re: [PATCH v3 10/10] vfio: unplug failover primary device before migration

[Alex Williamson]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 22:18:47 +0200
Jens Freimann <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 07:52:12PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:20:15 +0200
> >Jens Freimann <address@hidden> wrote:
> >  
> >> As usual block all vfio-pci devices from being migrated, but make an
> >> exception for failover primary devices. This is achieved by setting
> >> unmigratable to 0 but also add a migration blocker for all vfio-pci
> >> devices except failover primary devices. These will be unplugged before
> >> migration happens by the migration handler of the corresponding
> >> virtio-net standby device.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jens Freimann <address@hidden>
> >> ---
> >>  hw/vfio/pci.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>  hw/vfio/pci.h |  2 ++
> >>  2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> >> index c5e6fe61cb..64cf8e07d9 100644
> >> --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c
> >> +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> >> @@ -40,6 +40,9 @@
> >>  #include "pci.h"
> >>  #include "trace.h"
> >>  #include "qapi/error.h"
> >> +#include "migration/blocker.h"
> >> +#include "qemu/option.h"
> >> +#include "qemu/option_int.h"
> >>
> >>  #define TYPE_VFIO_PCI "vfio-pci"
> >>  #define PCI_VFIO(obj)    OBJECT_CHECK(VFIOPCIDevice, obj, TYPE_VFIO_PCI)
> >> @@ -2698,6 +2701,12 @@ static void 
> >> vfio_unregister_req_notifier(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev)
> >>      vdev->req_enabled = false;
> >>  }
> >>
> >> +static int has_net_failover_arg(void *opaque, const char *name,
> >> +                           const char *value, Error **errp)
> >> +{
> >> +    return (strcmp(name, "net_failover_pair_id") == 0);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>  static void vfio_realize(PCIDevice *pdev, Error **errp)
> >>  {
> >>      VFIOPCIDevice *vdev = PCI_VFIO(pdev);
> >> @@ -2710,6 +2719,20 @@ static void vfio_realize(PCIDevice *pdev, Error 
> >> **errp)
> >>      int groupid;
> >>      int i, ret;
> >>      bool is_mdev;
> >> +    uint16_t class_id;
> >> +
> >> +    if (qemu_opt_foreach(pdev->qdev.opts, has_net_failover_arg,
> >> +                         (void *) pdev->qdev.opts, &err) == 0) {  
> >
> >Why do we need a qemu_opt_foreach here versus testing
> >vdev->net_failover_pair_id as you do below or similar to how we test
> >sysfsdev immediately below this chunk?  
> 
> We don't need it, I will change it and move it to where we check for
> the PCI class.
> >  
> >> +        error_setg(&vdev->migration_blocker,
> >> +                "VFIO device doesn't support migration");
> >> +        ret = migrate_add_blocker(vdev->migration_blocker, &err);  
> >
> >Where's the migrate_del_blocker()/error_free() for any other realize
> >error or device removal?
> >  
> >> +        if (err) {
> >> +            error_propagate(errp, err);
> >> +            error_free(vdev->migration_blocker);
> >> +        }  
> >
> >As Connie noted, unclear if this aborts or continues without a
> >migration blocker, which would be bad.  
> 
> It aborts in my test. PCI realize propagates it further and eventually
> it leads to aborting qemu.
> 
> It looks like this now:
> 
>      if (!pdev->net_failover_pair_id) {
>           error_setg(&vdev->migration_blocker,
>                   "VFIO device doesn't support migration");
>           ret = migrate_add_blocker(vdev->migration_blocker, &err);
>           if (err) {
>               error_propagate(errp, err);
>           } else {
>               error_propagate(errp, vdev->migration_blocker);
>           }
>           goto error;

This unconditionally goes to error when we don't have a failover pair
set :-\

I suspect we don't want any sort of error propagate in the success
case, the migration_blocker pre-defines the error when the migration is
blocked, right?  Thanks,

Alex

>       } else {
>           pdev->qdev.allow_unplug_during_migration = true;
>       }
> 
> >> +    } else {
> >> +        pdev->qdev.allow_unplug_during_migration = true;
> >> +    }
> >>
> >>      if (!vdev->vbasedev.sysfsdev) {
> >>          if (!(~vdev->host.domain || ~vdev->host.bus ||
> >> @@ -2812,6 +2835,14 @@ static void vfio_realize(PCIDevice *pdev, Error 
> >> **errp)
> >>          goto error;
> >>      }
> >>
> >> +    if (vdev->net_failover_pair_id != NULL) {
> >> +        class_id = pci_get_word(pdev->config + PCI_CLASS_DEVICE);
> >> +        if (class_id != PCI_CLASS_NETWORK_ETHERNET) {
> >> +            error_setg(errp, "failover device is not an Ethernet device");
> >> +            goto error;
> >> +        }
> >> +    }  
> >
> >Not clear to me why we do this separate from setting up the migration
> >blocker or why we use a different mechanism to test for the property.  
> 
> I'm moving this check to hw/pci/pci.c as you suggested.
> 
> >> +
> >>      /* vfio emulates a lot for us, but some bits need extra love */
> >>      vdev->emulated_config_bits = g_malloc0(vdev->config_size);
> >>
> >> @@ -3110,6 +3141,8 @@ static Property vfio_pci_dev_properties[] = {
> >>                              display, ON_OFF_AUTO_OFF),
> >>      DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("xres", VFIOPCIDevice, display_xres, 0),
> >>      DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("yres", VFIOPCIDevice, display_yres, 0),
> >> +    DEFINE_PROP_STRING("net_failover_pair_id", VFIOPCIDevice,
> >> +            net_failover_pair_id),  
> >
> >Should this and the Ethernet class test be done in PCIDevice?  The
> >migration aspect is the only thing unique to vfio since we don't
> >otherwise support it, right?  For instance, I should be able to
> >setup an emulated NIC with this failover pair id too, right?  Thanks,  
> 
> Yes, we can do it in PCIDevice. Using it with an emulated device.
> It wouldn't make sense for production but could make sense for
> testing purposes.
> 
> Thanks for the review!
> 
> regards,
> Jens