Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 04:34:58 -0400
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To:     Alvaro Karsz <alvaro.karsz@solid-run.com>
Cc:     Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
        "kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: reject small vring sizes
Message-ID: <20230425041352-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
References: <20230417051816-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <AM0PR04MB47237705695AFD873DEE4530D49C9@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230417073830-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <AM0PR04MB4723FA4F0FFEBD25903E3344D49C9@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230417075645-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <AM0PR04MB4723FA90465186B5A8A5C001D4669@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230423031308-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <AM0PR04MB47233B680283E892C45430BCD4669@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230423065132-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <AM0PR04MB47237D46ADE7954289025B66D4669@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <AM0PR04MB47237D46ADE7954289025B66D4669@AM0PR04MB4723.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 12:28:49PM +0000, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> 
> > > > The rest of stuff can probably just be moved to after find_vqs without
> > > > much pain.
> > > >
> > > Actually, I think that with a little bit of pain :)
> > > If we use small vrings and a GRO feature bit is set, Linux will need to allocate 64KB of continuous memory for every receive descriptor..
> > 
> > Oh right. Hmm. Well this is same as big packets though, isn't it?
> > 
> 
> Well, when VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF is not negotiated and one of the GRO features is, the receive buffers are page size buffers chained together to form a 64K buffer.
> In this case, do all the chained descriptors actually point to a single block of continuous memory, or is it possible for the descriptors to point to pages spread all over?
> 
> > 
> > > Instead of failing probe if GRO/CVQ are set, can we just reset the device if we discover small vrings and start over?
> > > Can we remember that this device uses small vrings, and then just avoid negotiating the features that we cannot support?
> > 
> > 
> > We technically can of course. I am just not sure supporting CVQ with just 1 s/g entry will
> > ever be viable.
> 
> Even if we won't support 1 s/g entry, do we want to fail probe in such cases?
> We could just disable the CVQ feature (with reset, as suggested before).
> I'm not saying that we should, just raising the option.
> 

So, let's add some funky flags in virtio device to block out
features, have core compare these before and after,
detect change, reset and retry?


-- 
MST