Thread (52 messages) 52 messages, 4 authors, 2021-10-06

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2021-10-05 11:11:17
Also in: linux-s390, lkml, qemu-devel

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 05:07:13 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:23:23AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
quoted
On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 14:13:37 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] wrote:
  
quoted
quoted
Anyone else have an idea? This is a nasty regression; we could revert the
patch, which would remove the symptoms and give us some time, but that
doesn't really feel right, I'd do that only as a last resort.    
Well we have Halil's hack (except I would limit it
to only apply to BE, only do devices with validate,
and only in modern mode), and we will fix QEMU to be spec compliant.
Between these why do we need any conditional compiles?  
We don't. As I stated before, this hack is flawed because it
effectively breaks fencing features by the driver with QEMU. Some
features can not be unset after once set, because we tend to try to
enable the corresponding functionality whenever we see a write
features operation with the feature bit set, and we don't disable, if a
subsequent features write operation stores the feature bit as not set.  
Something to fix in QEMU too, I think.
Possibly. But it is the same situation: it probably has a long
history. And it may even make some sense. The obvious trigger for
doing the conditional initialization for modern is the setting of
FEATURES_OK. The problem is, legacy doesn't do FEATURES_OK. So we would
need a different trigger.
quoted
quoted
But it looks like VIRTIO_1 is fine to get cleared afterwards.  
We'd never clear it though - why would we?
Right.
quoted
quoted
So my hack
should actually look like posted below, modulo conditions.  

Looking at it some more, I see that vhost-user actually
does not send features to the backend until FEATURES_OK.
I.e. the hack does not work for transitional vhost-user devices,
but it doesn't break them either.

Furthermore, I believe there is not much we can do to support
transitional devices with vhost-user and similar, without extending
the protocol. The transport specific detection idea would need a new
vhost-user thingy to tell the device what has been figured
out, right?

In theory modern only could work, if the backends were paying extra
attention to endianness, instead of just assuming that the code is
running little-endian.
I think a reasonable thing is to send SET_FEATURES before each
GET_CONFIG, to tell backend which format is expected.
quoted
However, the code in contrib for vhost-user-blk at least seems
broken wrt endian-ness ATM.
Agree. For example config is native endian ATM AFAICT. 
quoted
What about other backends though?
I think whenever the config is owned and managed by the vhost-backend
we have a problem with transitional. And we don't have everything in
the protocol to deal with this problem.

I didn't check modern for the different vhost-user backends. I don't
think we recommend our users on s390 to use those. My understanding
of the use-cases is far form complete.
quoted
Hard to be sure right?
I agree.
quoted
Cc Raphael and Stefan so they can take a look.
And I guess it's time we CC'd qemu-devel too.

For now I am beginning to think we should either revert or just limit
validation to LE and think about all this some more. And I am inclining
to do a revert.
I'm fine with either of these as a quick fix, but we will eventually have
to find a solution. AFAICT this solution works for the s390 setups we
care about the most, but so would a revert.
The reason I like this one is that it also fixes MTU for virtio net,
and that one we can't really revert.

quoted
These are all hypervisors that shipped for a long time.
Do we need a flag for early config space access then?
You mean a feature bit? I think it is a good idea even if
it weren't strictly necessary. We will have a behavior change
for some devices, and I think the ability to detect those
is valuable.

Your spec change proposal, makes it IMHO pretty clear, that
we are changing our understanding of how transitional should work.
Strictly, transitional is not a normative part of the spec AFAIU,
but still...

quoted

quoted
Regarding the conditions I guess checking that driver_features has
F_VERSION_1 already satisfies "only modern mode", or?  
Right.
quoted
For now
I've deliberately omitted the has verify and the is big endian
conditions so we have a better chance to see if something breaks
(i.e. the approach does not work). I can add in those extra conditions
later.  
Or maybe if we will go down that road just the verify check (for
performance). I'm a bit unhappy we have the extra exit but consistency
seems more important.
I'm fine either way. The extra exit is only for the initialization and
one per 1 device, I have no feeling if this has a measurable performance
impact.

quoted
quoted
--------------------------8<---------------------

From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 02:38:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] virtio: write back feature VERSION_1 before verify

This patch fixes a regression introduced by commit 82e89ea077b9
("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space") and
enables similar checks in verify() on big endian platforms.

The problem with checking multi-byte config fields in the verify
callback, on big endian platforms, and with a possibly transitional
device is the following. The verify() callback is called between
config->get_features() and virtio_finalize_features(). That we have a
device that offered F_VERSION_1 then we have the following options
either the device is transitional, and then it has to present the legacy
interface, i.e. a big endian config space until F_VERSION_1 is
negotiated, or we have a non-transitional device, which makes
F_VERSION_1 mandatory, and only implements the non-legacy interface and
thus presents a little endian config space. Because at this point we
can't know if the device is transitional or non-transitional, we can't
know do we need to byte swap or not.  
Well we established that we can know. Here's an alternative explanation:

I thin we established how this should be in the future, where a transport
specific mechanism is used to decide are we operating in legacy mode or
in modern mode. But with the current QEMU reality, I don't think so.
Namely currently the switch native-endian config -> little endian config
happens when the VERSION_1 is negotiated, which may happen whenever
the VERSION_1 bit is changed, or only when FEATURES_OK is set
(vhost-user).

This is consistent with device should detect a legacy driver by checking
for VERSION_1, which is what the spec currently says.

So for transitional we start out with native-endian config. For modern
only the config is always LE.

The guest can distinguish between a legacy only device and a modern
capable device after the revision negotiation. A legacy device would
reject the CCW.

But both a transitional device and a modern only device would accept
a revision > 0. So the guest does not know for ccw.

Sorry I was talking about the host not the guest.
when host sees revision > 0 it knows it's a modern guest
and so config should be LE.
quoted
	The virtio specification virtio-v1.1-cs01 states:

	Transitional devices MUST detect Legacy drivers by detecting that
	VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 has not been acknowledged by the driver.
	This is exactly what QEMU as of 6.1 has done relying solely
	on VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 for detecting that.

	However, the specification also says:
	driver MAY read (but MUST NOT write) the device-specific
	configuration fields to check that it can support the device before
	accepting it.
s/ accepting it/setting FEATURES_OK
quoted
	In that case, any device relying solely on VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1
s/any device/any transitional device/
quoted
	for detecting legacy drivers will return data in legacy format.
E.g. virtio-crypto does not support legacy, and thus it is always
providing an LE config space.
quoted
	In particular, this implies that it is in big endian format
	for big endian guests. This naturally confuses the driver
	which expects little endian in the modern mode.

	It is probably a good idea to amend the spec to clarify that
	VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 can only be relied on after the feature negotiation
	is complete. However, we already have regression so let's
	try to address it.
I can take the new description without any changes if you like.
I care
more about getting a decent fix, than a perfect patch description. Should
I send out a non-RFC with that implements the proposed changes?
Also add a shortened version to the code comment pls.
quoted
quoted
The virtio spec explicitly states that the driver MAY read config
between reading and writing the features so saying that first accessing
the config before feature negotiation is done is not an option. The
specification ain't clear about setting the features multiple times
before FEATURES_OK, so I guess that should be fine to set F_VERSION_1
since at this point we already know that we are about to negotiate
F_VERSION_1.

I don't consider this patch super clean, but frankly I don't think we
have a ton of options. Another option that may or man not be cleaner,
but is also IMHO much uglier is to figure out whether the device is
transitional by rejecting _F_VERSION_1, then resetting it and proceeding
according tho what we have figured out, hoping that the characteristics
of the device didn't change.  
An empty line before tags.
Sure!
 
quoted
quoted
Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Fixes: 82e89ea077b9 ("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space")
Reported-by: markver@us.ibm.com  
Let's add more commits that are affected. E.g. virtio-net with MTU
feature bit set is affected too.

So let's add Fixes tag for:
commit 14de9d114a82a564b94388c95af79a701dc93134
Author: Aaron Conole [off-list ref]
Date:   Fri Jun 3 16:57:12 2016 -0400

    virtio-net: Add initial MTU advice feature
    
I believe  drv->probe(dev) is called after the real finalize, so
that access should be fine or?

Don't we just have to look out for verify?
you mean validate.

Isn't the problematic commit fe36cbe0671e ("virtio_net: clear MTU when
out of range")?
exactly.
The problem with commit 14de9d114a82a is that the device won't know,
the driver didn't take the advice (for the MTU because it deemed its
value invalid). But that doesn't really hurt us.
On the other hand with fe36cbe0671e we may deem a valid MTU in the
config space invalid because of the endiannes mess-up. I that case
we would discard a perfectly good MTU advice.
right.
quoted
I think that's all, but pls double check me.

Looks good!
$ git grep -e '\.validate' -- '*virtio*'
drivers/block/virtio_blk.c:     .validate                       = virtblk_validate,
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/virtio.c:     .validate = scmi_vio_validate,
drivers/net/virtio_net.c:       .validate =     virtnet_validate,
drivers/virtio/virtio_balloon.c:        .validate =     virtballoon_validate,
sound/virtio/virtio_card.c:     .validate = virtsnd_validate,

But only blk and net access config space from validate.
quoted
quoted
---
 drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
index 0a5b54034d4b..2b9358f2e22a 100644
--- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
+++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
@@ -239,6 +239,12 @@ static int virtio_dev_probe(struct device *_d)
 		driver_features_legacy = driver_features;
 	}
 
+	/* Write F_VERSION_1 feature to pin down endianness */
+	if (device_features & (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1) & driver_features) {
+		dev->features = (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1);
+		dev->config->finalize_features(dev);
+	}
+
 	if (device_features & (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
 		dev->features = driver_features & device_features;
 	else
-- 
2.31.1





   
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help