[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] virtio-rng: stop virtqueue while the CPU is
From: |
Stefan Hajnoczi |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] virtio-rng: stop virtqueue while the CPU is stopped |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 10:57:31 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) |
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 07:42:02PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> On 11/04/2017 19:02, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:17:33PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> >> diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c
> >> index 9639f4e..d270d56 100644
> >> --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c
> >> +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c
> >> @@ -53,6 +53,15 @@ static void chr_read(void *opaque, const void *buf,
> >> size_t size)
> >> return;
> >> }
> >>
> >> + /* we can't modify the virtqueue until
> >> + * our state is fully synced
> >> + */
> >> +
> >> + if (!runstate_check(RUN_STATE_RUNNING)) {
> >> + trace_virtio_rng_cpu_is_stopped(vrng);
> >> + return;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >
> > I'm concerned about what happens when the guest is stopped and resumed
> > (e.g. 'stop' and 'cont' monitor commands). Since we throw away the
> > chr_read() callback the device will hang unless the guest kicks it
> > again?
> >
> > It's not clear to me that the rate limit timer will help us...
>
> I think you're right (even if it seems hard to generate this case)
>
> What is the best solution:
>
> - re-arming the timer/the backend request by calling
> virtio_rng_process() before the "return;"
This would waste CPU and throw away entropy bits.
> or
>
> - adding a vmstate change handler to call virtio_rng_process()?
Yes, I think vm change handlers solve the problem.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature