qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 7/7] vhost-user: call VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE synchronous


From: Stefano Garzarella
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] vhost-user: call VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE synchronously
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:39:37 +0200

On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 08:29:37PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
(1) The virtio-1.0 specification
<http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.0/virtio-v1.0.html> writes:

What about referring the latest spec available now (1.2)?


3     General Initialization And Device Operation
3.1   Device Initialization
3.1.1 Driver Requirements: Device Initialization

[...]

7. Perform device-specific setup, including discovery of virtqueues for
   the device, optional per-bus setup, reading and possibly writing the
   device’s virtio configuration space, and population of virtqueues.

8. Set the DRIVER_OK status bit. At this point the device is “live”.

and

4         Virtio Transport Options
4.1       Virtio Over PCI Bus
4.1.4     Virtio Structure PCI Capabilities
4.1.4.3   Common configuration structure layout
4.1.4.3.2 Driver Requirements: Common configuration structure layout

[...]

The driver MUST configure the other virtqueue fields before enabling the
virtqueue with queue_enable.

[...]

These together mean that the following sub-sequence of steps is valid for
a virtio-1.0 guest driver:

(1.1) set "queue_enable" for the needed queues as the final part of device
initialization step (7),

(1.2) set DRIVER_OK in step (8),

(1.3) immediately start sending virtio requests to the device.

(2) When vhost-user is enabled, and the VHOST_USER_F_PROTOCOL_FEATURES
special virtio feature is negotiated, then virtio rings start in disabled
state, according to
<https://qemu-project.gitlab.io/qemu/interop/vhost-user.html#ring-states>.
In this case, explicit VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE messages are needed for
enabling vrings.

Therefore setting "queue_enable" from the guest (1.1) is a *control plane*
operation, which travels from the guest through QEMU to the vhost-user
backend, using a unix domain socket.

Whereas sending a virtio request (1.3) is a *data plane* operation, which
evades QEMU -- it travels from guest to the vhost-user backend via
eventfd.

This means that steps (1.1) and (1.3) travel through different channels,
and their relative order can be reversed, as perceived by the vhost-user
backend.

That's exactly what happens when OVMF's virtiofs driver (VirtioFsDxe) runs
against the Rust-language virtiofsd version 1.7.2. (Which uses version
0.10.1 of the vhost-user-backend crate, and version 0.8.1 of the vhost
crate.)

Namely, when VirtioFsDxe binds a virtiofs device, it goes through the
device initialization steps (i.e., control plane operations), and
immediately sends a FUSE_INIT request too (i.e., performs a data plane
operation). In the Rust-language virtiofsd, this creates a race between
two components that run *concurrently*, i.e., in different threads or
processes:

- Control plane, handling vhost-user protocol messages:

 The "VhostUserSlaveReqHandlerMut::set_vring_enable" method
 [crates/vhost-user-backend/src/handler.rs] handles
 VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE messages, and updates each vring's "enabled"
 flag according to the message processed.

- Data plane, handling virtio / FUSE requests:

 The "VringEpollHandler::handle_event" method
 [crates/vhost-user-backend/src/event_loop.rs] handles the incoming
 virtio / FUSE request, consuming the virtio kick at the same time. If
 the vring's "enabled" flag is set, the virtio / FUSE request is
 processed genuinely. If the vring's "enabled" flag is clear, then the
 virtio / FUSE request is discarded.

Note that OVMF enables the queue *first*, and sends FUSE_INIT *second*.
However, if the data plane processor in virtiofsd wins the race, then it
sees the FUSE_INIT *before* the control plane processor took notice of
VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE and green-lit the queue for the data plane
processor. Therefore the latter drops FUSE_INIT on the floor, and goes
back to waiting for further virtio / FUSE requests with epoll_wait.
Meanwhile OVMF is stuck waiting for the FUSET_INIT response -- a deadlock.

The deadlock is not deterministic. OVMF hangs infrequently during first
boot. However, OVMF hangs almost certainly during reboots from the UEFI
shell.

The race can be "reliably masked" by inserting a very small delay -- a
single debug message -- at the top of "VringEpollHandler::handle_event",
i.e., just before the data plane processor checks the "enabled" field of
the vring. That delay suffices for the control plane processor to act upon
VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE.

We can deterministically prevent the race in QEMU, by blocking OVMF inside
step (1.1) -- i.e., in the write to the "queue_enable" register -- until
VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE actually *completes*. That way OVMF's VCPU
cannot advance to the FUSE_INIT submission before virtiofsd's control
plane processor takes notice of the queue being enabled.

Wait for VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE completion by:

- setting the NEED_REPLY flag on VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, and waiting
 for the reply, if the VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_ACK vhost-user feature
 has been negotiated, or

- performing a separate VHOST_USER_GET_FEATURES *exchange*, which requires
 a backend response regardless of VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_ACK.

Thanks for the excellent analysis (and fix of course!).


Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> (supporter:vhost)
Cc: Eugenio Perez Martin <eperezma@redhat.com>
Cc: German Maglione <gmaglione@redhat.com>
Cc: Liu Jiang <gerry@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Sergio Lopez Pascual <slp@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
---
hw/virtio/vhost-user.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
index beb4b832245e..01e0ca90c538 100644
--- a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
+++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c
@@ -1235,7 +1235,7 @@ static int vhost_user_set_vring_enable(struct vhost_dev 
*dev, int enable)
            .num   = enable,
        };


How about adding a small comment here summarizing the commit message in
a few lines?

Should we cc stable for this fix?


In any case, the fix LGTM, so:

Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>

-        ret = vhost_set_vring(dev, VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, &state, false);
+        ret = vhost_set_vring(dev, VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE, &state, true);
        if (ret < 0) {
            /*
             * Restoring the previous state is likely infeasible, as well as




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]