Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755695AbaJWMs3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2014 08:48:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21417 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755555AbaJWMsL (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2014 08:48:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 15:51:39 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Cornelia Huck Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 09/16] virtio: set FEATURES_OK Message-ID: <20141023125139.GA10033@redhat.com> References: <1414003404-505-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1414003404-505-10-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20141023142808.377551d8.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141023142808.377551d8.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 02:28:08PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:44:44 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > set FEATURES_OK as per virtio 1.0 spec > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > > --- > > include/uapi/linux/virtio_config.h | 2 ++ > > drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > dev->config->finalize_features(dev); > > > > + if (virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) { > > + add_status(dev, VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK); > > + status = dev->config->get_status(dev); > > + if (!(status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK)) { > > + printk(KERN_ERR "virtio: device refuses features: %x\n", > > + status); > > + err = -ENODEV; > > + goto err; > > + } > > + } > > + > > Ugh, I just realize that virtio-ccw has a problem with that mechanism :( > > Up to now, the driver only propagated status to the device: For > virtio-ccw, this was easily implemented via a ccw that transmitted > "status" to the device. However, the "read back status" part now > actually requires that the driver can get "status" from the device, or > has a comparable way to find out that the device won't accept the > status it tried to write. Ugh, it actually caches the status in the transport :( > I can think of two solutions: > > (1) Introduce a new ccw that actually reads the device status. > (2) Make the WRITE_STATUS ccw fail (with a unit check) if the driver > sets FEATURES_OK after it tried to set features the device won't > accept. > > (1) is probably more generic, while (2) is more straightforward to > implement. > > Good thing we actually try to finally implement this, > I did not notice > this problem during the review :( Well, it's a nuisance, but the spec is out. It seems to me a new command would be a substantive change so we can't do this in errata. Option (2) would require two statements for drivers and devices, but since it's clearly the case for correct drivers/devices that command does not fail, it follows that this is not a substantive change so it can be fixed in an errata. So the new command would have to be optional, please open two issues in the TC: one documenting that driver must check WRITE_STATUS and device can fail WRITE_STATUS, and another for adding READ_STATUS (which will have to wait until the next CS). -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/