Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 6/8] spapr: move interrupt allocator to xics

[Alexander Graf]

On 11.04.14 18:30, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 04/12/2014 02:15 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > On 11.04.14 18:01, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > On 04/12/2014 01:38 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > On 11.04.14 17:27, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > > On 04/12/2014 12:58 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > > > On 11.04.14 16:50, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > > > > On 04/11/2014 11:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 11.04.2014, at 14:38, Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 04/11/2014 07:24 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 10.04.14 16:43, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 04/10/2014 11:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10.04.14 15:24, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 04/10/2014 10:51 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 14.03.14 05:18, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current allocator returns IRQ numbers from a pool and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > support IRQs reuse in any form as it did not keep track of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > previously returned, it only had the last returned IRQ.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However migration may change interrupts for devices depending on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their order in the command line.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wtf? Nonono, this sounds very bogus and wrong. Migration
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > shouldn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > anything.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I put wrong commit message. By change I meant that the default
> > > > > > > > > > > > > state
> > > > > > > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the destination guest started accepting migration is different
> > > > > > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the destination guest became after migration finished. And
> > > > > > > > > > > > > migration
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > avoid changing this default state.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, why is the IRQ configuration different?
> > > > > > > > > > > Because QEMU creates devices in the order as in the command line,
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > libvirt changes this order - the XML used to create the guest and
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > XML
> > > > > > > > > > > which is sends during migration are different. libvirt thinks it
> > > > > > > > > > > is ok
> > > > > > > > > > > while it keeps @reg property for (for example) spapr-vscsi devices
> > > > > > > > > > > but it
> > > > > > > > > > > is not because since the order is different, devices call IRQ
> > > > > > > > > > > allocator in
> > > > > > > > > > > different order and get different IRQs.
> > > > > > > > > > So your patch migrates the current IRQ configuration, but once you
> > > > > > > > > > restart
> > > > > > > > > > the virtual machine on the destination host it will have different
> > > > > > > > > > IRQ
> > > > > > > > > > numbering again, right?
> > > > > > > > > No, why? IRQs are assigned at init time from realize() callbacks (and
> > > > > > > > > survive reset) or as a part of ibm,change-msi rtas call which
> > > > > > > > > happens in
> > > > > > > > > the same order as it only depends on pci addresses and we do not
> > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > this either.
> > > > > > > > Ok, let me rephrase. If I shut the machine down because I'm doing
> > > > > > > > on-disk hibernate and then boot it back up, will the guest find the
> > > > > > > > same
> > > > > > > > configuration?
> > > > > > > I do not understand what you mean by this. Hibernation by the guest OS
> > > > > > > itself or by QEMU? If this involves QEMU exit and QEMU start - then yes,
> > > > > > by the guest OS. The host will only see a genuine "shutdown" event. The
> > > > > > guest OS will expect the machine to look *the exact same* as before the
> > > > > > shutdown.
> > > > > Ok. So. I have to implement "irq" property everywhere (PHB is missing
> > > > > INTA/B/C/D now) and check if they did not change during migration via
> > > > > those
> > > > Hrm. Not sure. Maybe it'd make sense to join next week's call on platform
> > > > device creation. The problem seems pretty closely related.
> > > What are those platform devices and what are you going to discuss exactly?
> > Devices that don't have a unified interrupt routing scheme like PCI where
> > you just link lines A/B/C/D to your controller and you're good to go.
> Ah. VIO in my case.
>
>
>
> > > > > VMSTATE.*EQUAL. Correct?
> > > > Why would you need this? I think we already said a couple dozen times that
> > > > configuration matching is a bigger problem, no?
> > > For debug! It is not needed in general, yes.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > If so (more or less), I still would like to keep patches 1..7.
> > > > > In fact, the first one is independent and we need it anyway.
> > > > > Yes/no?
> > > > Why?
> > > IOMMUs do not migrate correctly - they only have a class have and
> > > instance_id and this instance_it depends on command line arguments order.
> > > The #1 patch makes it classname + liobn.
> > Why do we need a bus for that?
>
> For BusClass::get_dev_path callback to get an unique name.

Juan, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to require a new fake bus 
just to give us a consistent migration view of things.

Do you have any ideas how to migration busless devices? We could just 
detect that case and give them numbering based on their occurence in the 
global QOM hierarchy, no?

Andreas, maybe you have an idea here as well :).


Alex