[libvirt] [PATCH v4 05/10] Split reprobe action from the virPCIUnbindFromStub into a new function

Shivaprasad G Bhat sbhat at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Fri Nov 20 18:53:18 UTC 2015

On 11/20/2015 11:30 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 12:24 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
>> On 11/20/2015 11:58 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 11:33 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
>>>> Seems safe, but is this really what we want to do? I haven't
>>>> read/understood the remaining patches yet, but this makes it sound like
>>>> what is going to happen is that all of the devices will be unbound from
>>>> vfio-pci immediately, so they are "in limbo", and will then be reprobed
>>>> once all devices are unused (and therefore unbound from vfio-pci).
>>>> I think that may be a bit dangerous. Instead, we should leave the
>>>> devices bound to vfio-pci until all of them are unused, and at that
>>>> time, we should unbind them all from vfio-pci, then reprobe them all.
>>>> (again, I may have misunderstood the direction, if so ignore this).
>>> I agree, we should not unbind any device from vfio-pci until
>>> all the devices in the IOMMU group have been detached from
>>> the guest.
>> ... and I've just looked back at my original comment about this in the
>> BZ, and see that at that time I only suggested delaying the reprobe, but
>> said nothing about delaying the unbind. And I'm not as sure about the
>> necessity of waiting as I was 1/2 an hour ago. I suppose the issue is
>> that it brings all those unbound devices one step closer to getting
>> bound to the host driver. However, that will happen only if those
>> device's PCI addresses are written to "drivers_reprobe" in sysfs (right?
>> is there any other way a more "global" reprobe could happen and snatch
>> up everything that's currently unbound?)
> Any load of a module will snatch up any unclaimed devices that match it,
> so if you unbind and leave the devices orpaned, a random module load
> could cause much badness.  Adding a new_id will also cause a device
> scan, so if that happened to match the device: random badness.
>> So maybe I'd better ask someone who knows more about this than me -
>> Alex, is there an issue with unbinding some devices in an iommu group
>> from vfio-pci at an earlier time, and leaving then unbound to any driver
>> at all while some other devices in the group are still in use by the
>> guest? Is there an advantage to keeping them all bound to vfio-pci until
>> none of them are used, and then unbinding/reprobing them all at the same
>> time? Or should we unbind each from vfio-pci immediately when they are
>> detached from the guest, and reprobe them all once they're all unbound?
> Unbinding them from vfio-pci leaves them susceptible to random bad
> things happen, as outlined above, and potentially limits vfio's ability
> to do things like bus resets.  For instance imagine a 2-port NIC where
> each port is a PCI function, the functions are grouped together and the
> devices don't support any sort of internal reset.  If both devices are
> bound to vfio-pci, then the user owns them both and we can do a bus
> reset.  If one of those devices gets released from the user, as soon as
> it's unbound from vfio-pci it's no longer in our control and the bus
> rest option is gone.
> The best course of action would be to leave any managed devices bound to
> vfio-pci until all of the devices within the group are no longer in use.
> Thanks,
Hi Laine, Alex,

I am actually queuing the unbind from vfio until the last device 
reattach is requested
when any device in the iommu group is in use by the guest.
So, I believe this is taken care. Patch 9 is doing this.


> Alex

More information about the libvir-list mailing list