[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifie
From: |
Venu Busireddy |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices... |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:55:07 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) |
On 2018-06-27 22:27:33 -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> On 2018-06-28 04:54:16 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:34:17PM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > On 2018-06-27 23:12:12 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:59:01PM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > > > On 2018-06-27 22:47:05 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:29:58PM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2018-06-27 15:24:58 +0300, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:49:30PM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > The patch set "Enable virtio_net to act as a standby for a
> > > > > > > > > passthru
> > > > > > > > > device" [1] deals with live migration of guests that use
> > > > > > > > > passthrough
> > > > > > > > > devices. However, that scheme uses the MAC address for pairing
> > > > > > > > > the virtio device and the passthrough device. The thread
> > > > > > > > > "netvsc:
> > > > > > > > > refactor notifier/event handling code to use the failover
> > > > > > > > > framework"
> > > > > > > > > [2] discusses an alternate mechanism, such as using an UUID,
> > > > > > > > > for pairing
> > > > > > > > > the devices. Based on that discussion, proposals "Add "Group
> > > > > > > > > Identifier"
> > > > > > > > > to virtio PCI capabilities." [3] and "RFC: Use of bridge
> > > > > > > > > devices to
> > > > > > > > > store pairing information..." [4] were made.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I must have missed something in those threads, but where does
> > > > > > > > this UUID
> > > > > > > > thing come about? AFAICS this identifier doesn't need to be
> > > > > > > > "universally" unique, nor persistent; it only has to be unique
> > > > > > > > across
> > > > > > > > the VM and stable throughout the VM lifetime.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The notion of using UUID came up in the thread
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg499011.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's probably because it was expected one of standard serial
> > > > > > number capabilities
> > > > > > (VPD or PCI Express serial #) will be used, which are expected to
> > > > > > be unique.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are rolling your own vendor specific one, it's just an ID and
> > > > > > does not have to be unique.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > FWIW Hyper-V uses a 32-bit integer for this purpose, not a UUID
> > > > > > > > as seems
> > > > > > > > to be implied in the thread you refer to.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, Hyper-V uses a serial number (but I think it is 64-bit
> > > > > > > value).
> > > > > > > However, what we are doing is similar to that. Instead of 32 bits,
> > > > > > > we are using 128 bits.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's OK. The name is confusing though. It's a failover group id,
> > > > > > not a UUID.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure, we can name it whatever we want. I can change it to
> > > > > "failover-group-id", if that is what we want to call it.
> > > > >
> > > > > But what is more important is, what is represented by that name? I
> > > > > thought
> > > > > we were going to use UUID. The QEMU command line changes in this patch
> > > > > set expect the user to specify an UUID as the value for this option
> > > > > (whatever we name it). Are we still in agreement about that, or do you
> > > > > propose something else to be used? If so, what is it? A 32-bit
> > > > > number, a
> > > > > 64-bit number, or an arbitrary string?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Venu
> > > >
> > > > If we don't really need a UUID, I'd avoid that requirement.
> > >
> > > I don't see the need for a 128-bit UUID. I just took that approach because
> > > UUID was mentioned in
> > > "https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg499011.html".
> > > Since it is unlikely to have more than 4 billion devices in the system,
> > > a 32-bit value would be more than enough to uniquely identify devices!
> > >
> > > I am looking for direction from you :-). Roman already opined that UUID
> > > may be an overkill. It appears that you too are leaning that way. Would
> > > it be acceptable if I change the group identifier ("failover-group-id")
> > > to a 32-bit value? If you concur, I will start reworking my patch. Could
> > > you please confirm?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Venu
> >
> > I would do a 64 bit one, just in case we want to use PCI Express Device
> > Serial Number down the road.
>
> Will do.
I have incorporated all the changes suggested by you. They are:
* Changed the failover group identifier from UUID to a 64-bit value.
* Changed the command line option from "uuid" to * "failover-group-id".
* Tweaked the "pci-bridge" device's Device ID to
* PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_BRIDGE_FAILOVER.
* Added to new device "pcie-downstream" with Device ID
PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_DOWNPORT_FAILOVER (to support the PCIe case).
* Changed the patch for virtio specification to reflect the above
changes.
Shall I post v3 for review?
Thanks,
Venu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The current patch set includes all the feedback received for
> > > > > > > > > proposals [3]
> > > > > > > > > and [4]. For the sake of completeness, patch for the virtio
> > > > > > > > > specification
> > > > > > > > > is also included here. Following is the updated proposal.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. Extend the virtio specification to include a new virtio
> > > > > > > > > PCI capability
> > > > > > > > > "VIRTIO_PCI_CAP_GROUP_ID_CFG".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2. Enhance the QEMU CLI to include a "uuid" option to the
> > > > > > > > > virtio device.
> > > > > > > > > The "uuid" is a string in UUID format.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. Enhance the QEMU CLI to include a "uuid" option to the
> > > > > > > > > bridge device.
> > > > > > > > > The "uuid" is a string in UUID format. Currently, PCIe
> > > > > > > > > bridge for
> > > > > > > > > the Q35 model is supported.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4. The operator creates a unique identifier string using
> > > > > > > > > 'uuidgen'.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 5. When the virtio device is created, the operator uses the
> > > > > > > > > "uuid" option
> > > > > > > > > (for example, '-device virtio-net-pci,uuid="string"') and
> > > > > > > > > specifies
> > > > > > > > > the UUID created in step 4.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > QEMU stores the UUID in the virtio device's configuration
> > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > in the capability "VIRTIO_PCI_CAP_GROUP_ID_CFG".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 6. When assigning a PCI device to the guest in passthrough
> > > > > > > > > mode, the
> > > > > > > > > operator first creates a bridge using the "uuid" option
> > > > > > > > > (for example,
> > > > > > > > > '-device pcie-downstream,uuid="string"') to specify the
> > > > > > > > > UUID created
> > > > > > > > > in step 4, and then attaches the passthrough device to the
> > > > > > > > > bridge.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > QEMU stores the UUID in the configuration space of the
> > > > > > > > > bridge as
> > > > > > > > > Vendor-Specific capability (0x09). The "Vendor" here is
> > > > > > > > > not to be
> > > > > > > > > confused with a specific organization. Instead, the vendor
> > > > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > bridge is QEMU. To avoid mixing up with other bridges, the
> > > > > > > > > bridge
> > > > > > > > > will be created with vendor ID 0x1b36
> > > > > > > > > (PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT) and
> > > > > > > > > device ID 0x000e (PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PCIE_BRIDGE) if the
> > > > > > > > > "uuid"
> > > > > > > > > option is specified. Otherwise, current defaults are used.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I wonder if it makes more sense to drop the concept of failover
> > > > > > > > groups,
> > > > > > > > and just refer to the standby device by device-id, like
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -device virtio-net-pci,id=foo \
> > > > > > > > -device pcie-downstream,failover=foo
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Isn't this the same as what this patch series proposes? In your
> > > > > > > suggestion, "foo" is the entity that connects the passthrough
> > > > > > > device
> > > > > > > and the failover device. In this patch set, that "foo" is the
> > > > > > > UUID,
> > > > > > > and the options "id" and "failover" are replaced by "uuid". Do
> > > > > > > you agree?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Venu
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The bridge device will then lookup the failover device, figure
> > > > > > > > out the
> > > > > > > > common identifier to expose to the guest, and defer the
> > > > > > > > visibility of
> > > > > > > > the PT device behind the bridge until the guest acknowledged
> > > > > > > > the support
> > > > > > > > for failover on the PV device.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Roman.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: address@hidden
> For additional commands, e-mail: address@hidden
>
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Roman Kagan, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Venu Busireddy, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Venu Busireddy, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Venu Busireddy, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Venu Busireddy, 2018/06/27
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices...,
Venu Busireddy <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Michael S. Tsirkin, 2018/06/29
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Use of unique identifier for pairing virtio and passthrough devices..., Roman Kagan, 2018/06/28