Re: Long term approaches to mitigate device reset issue in vhost-user-scsi

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:40:41AM -0700, Raphael Norwitz wrote:
> Hi MST,
> 
> We are trying to develop a long term fix to the following issue with
> vhost-user-scsi:
> 
> When a live migration starts, Qemu sends a SET_VRING_ADDR message to
> update the VQ's flags (turning log on). We can't distinguish that
> message from the first SET_VRING_ADDR message sent after a device
> reset (given that vhost-user backends are not notified about resets).
> That distinction is important because we need to know whether to
> refetch the used ring from guest memory.


Could you clarify a bit more please?

According to the spec the trigger for starting/stopping
the rings is supposed to be VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_KICK,
not SET_VRING_ADDR.

What is this fetching you are talking about?


> A while back we sent a patch [1] (which we still use internally) to introduce 
> a
> message which tells vhost-user backends about device resets. No one
> ever responded to that patch. They are getting clunky to maintain
> and we would prefer to converge on a solution which is inline with
> upstream.
> 
> [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-03/msg05077.html
> 
> Vhost seems to support the concept of a reset through the reset_device
> callback in the VhostOps struct. Currently, the vhost-user VhostOps
> reset callback sends RESET_OWNER message.
> 
> The docs currently state, though, that this message is obsolete. Looking
> at the history, I see change d1f8b30ec8dde0318fd1b98d24a64926feae9625
> actually changed the message name to RESET_DEVICE, although it was
> subsequently changed back to RESET_OWNER.
> 
> With this in mind, we think the code should be improved by:
> 
> 1) Stopping qemu from sending the RESET_OWNER message on the
> vhost-user device_reset callback.
> 2) Amending the docs to better align with the code.
> 3) If you agree with 1), adding a separate DEVICE_RESET message.
> 
> If you agree with 1) and 3) would you reconsider patch [1]? If so, I will
> have to update the patch because the message/features numbers
> are now taken. Should I update the patch and resend?
> 
> If you don't plan on stopping Qemu from sending RESET_OWNER,
> I'd like to post a patch allowing vhost-user-scsi benefit from
> the RESET_OWNER message (as it currently don't offer a device
> reset callback).
> 
> Thanks,
> Raphael