From patchwork Tue Mar 12 14:54:10 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Maxime Coquelin X-Patchwork-Id: 51121 X-Patchwork-Delegate: maxime.coquelin@redhat.com Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF7E4CC3; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 15:54:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3E34CA0 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 15:54:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 844C6307DAAD; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 14:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-54.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.54]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74715C23B; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 14:54:18 +0000 (UTC) From: Maxime Coquelin To: dev@dpdk.org, changpeng.liu@intel.com, tiwei.bie@intel.com, i.maximets@samsung.com, dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com Cc: Maxime Coquelin Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 15:54:10 +0100 Message-Id: <20190312145410.570-3-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20190312145410.570-1-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> References: <20190312145410.570-1-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.42]); Tue, 12 Mar 2019 14:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] vhost: support requests only handled by external backend X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" External backends may have specific requests to handle, and so we don't want the vhost-user lib to handle these requests as errors. This patch also changes the experimental API by introducing RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED so that vhost-user lib can report an error if a message is handled neither by the vhost-user library nor by the external backend. The logic changes a bit so that if the callback returns with ERR, OK or REPLY, it is considered the message is handled by the external backend so it won't be handled by the vhost-user library. It is still possible for an external backend to listen to requests that have to be handled by the vhost-user library like SET_MEM_TABLE, but the callback have to return NOT_HANDLED in that case. Vhost-crypto backend is ialso adapted to this API change. Suggested-by: Ilya Maximets Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin Tested-by: Darek Stojaczyk --- lib/librte_vhost/rte_vhost.h | 16 +++++-- lib/librte_vhost/vhost_crypto.c | 10 +++- lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++------------ 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/rte_vhost.h b/lib/librte_vhost/rte_vhost.h index c9c392975..b1c5a0908 100644 --- a/lib/librte_vhost/rte_vhost.h +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/rte_vhost.h @@ -121,6 +121,8 @@ enum rte_vhost_msg_result { RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK = 0, /* Message handling successful and reply prepared */ RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY = 1, + /* Message not handled */ + RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED, }; /** @@ -135,11 +137,13 @@ enum rte_vhost_msg_result { * If the handler requires skipping the master message handling, this variable * shall be written 1, otherwise 0. * @return - * VH_RESULT_OK on success, VH_RESULT_REPLY on success with reply, - * VH_RESULT_ERR on failure + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK on success, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY on success with reply, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR on failure, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED if message was not handled. */ typedef enum rte_vhost_msg_result (*rte_vhost_msg_pre_handle)(int vid, - void *msg, uint32_t *skip_master); + void *msg); /** * Function prototype for the vhost backend to handler specific vhost user @@ -150,8 +154,10 @@ typedef enum rte_vhost_msg_result (*rte_vhost_msg_pre_handle)(int vid, * @param msg * Message pointer. * @return - * VH_RESULT_OK on success, VH_RESULT_REPLY on success with reply, - * VH_RESULT_ERR on failure + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK on success, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY on success with reply, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR on failure, + * RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED if message was not handled. */ typedef enum rte_vhost_msg_result (*rte_vhost_msg_post_handle)(int vid, void *msg); diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_crypto.c b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_crypto.c index 0f437c4a1..9b4b850e8 100644 --- a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_crypto.c +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_crypto.c @@ -453,14 +453,20 @@ vhost_crypto_msg_post_handler(int vid, void *msg) return RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR; } - if (vmsg->request.master == VHOST_USER_CRYPTO_CREATE_SESS) { + switch (vmsg->request.master) { + case VHOST_USER_CRYPTO_CREATE_SESS: vhost_crypto_create_sess(vcrypto, &vmsg->payload.crypto_session); vmsg->fd_num = 0; ret = RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY; - } else if (vmsg->request.master == VHOST_USER_CRYPTO_CLOSE_SESS) { + break; + case VHOST_USER_CRYPTO_CLOSE_SESS: if (vhost_crypto_close_sess(vcrypto, vmsg->payload.u64)) ret = RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR; + break; + default: + ret = RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED; + break; } return ret; diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c index 555d09ad9..39756fce7 100644 --- a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c +++ b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_user.c @@ -1910,7 +1910,7 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) int did = -1; int ret; int unlock_required = 0; - uint32_t skip_master = 0; + bool handled; int request; dev = get_device(vid); @@ -1928,27 +1928,30 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) } ret = read_vhost_message(fd, &msg); - if (ret <= 0 || msg.request.master >= VHOST_USER_MAX) { + if (ret <= 0) { if (ret < 0) RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, "vhost read message failed\n"); - else if (ret == 0) + else RTE_LOG(INFO, VHOST_CONFIG, "vhost peer closed\n"); - else - RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, - "vhost read incorrect message\n"); return -1; } ret = 0; - if (msg.request.master != VHOST_USER_IOTLB_MSG) - RTE_LOG(INFO, VHOST_CONFIG, "read message %s\n", - vhost_message_str[msg.request.master]); - else - RTE_LOG(DEBUG, VHOST_CONFIG, "read message %s\n", - vhost_message_str[msg.request.master]); + request = msg.request.master; + if (request > VHOST_USER_NONE && request < VHOST_USER_MAX && + vhost_message_str[request]) { + if (request != VHOST_USER_IOTLB_MSG) + RTE_LOG(INFO, VHOST_CONFIG, "read message %s\n", + vhost_message_str[request]); + else + RTE_LOG(DEBUG, VHOST_CONFIG, "read message %s\n", + vhost_message_str[request]); + } else { + RTE_LOG(DEBUG, VHOST_CONFIG, "External request %d\n", request); + } ret = vhost_user_check_and_alloc_queue_pair(dev, &msg); if (ret < 0) { @@ -1964,7 +1967,7 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) * inactive, so it is safe. Otherwise taking the access_lock * would cause a dead lock. */ - switch (msg.request.master) { + switch (request) { case VHOST_USER_SET_FEATURES: case VHOST_USER_SET_PROTOCOL_FEATURES: case VHOST_USER_SET_OWNER: @@ -1989,19 +1992,24 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) } + handled = false; if (dev->extern_ops.pre_msg_handle) { ret = (*dev->extern_ops.pre_msg_handle)(dev->vid, - (void *)&msg, &skip_master); - if (ret == RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR) - goto skip_to_reply; - else if (ret == RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY) + (void *)&msg); + switch (ret) { + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY: send_vhost_reply(fd, &msg); - - if (skip_master) + /* Fall-through */ + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR: + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK: + handled = true; goto skip_to_post_handle; + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED: + default: + break; + } } - request = msg.request.master; if (request > VHOST_USER_NONE && request < VHOST_USER_MAX) { if (!vhost_message_handlers[request]) goto skip_to_post_handle; @@ -2012,40 +2020,54 @@ vhost_user_msg_handler(int vid, int fd) RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, "Processing %s failed.\n", vhost_message_str[request]); + handled = true; break; case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK: RTE_LOG(DEBUG, VHOST_CONFIG, "Processing %s succeeded.\n", vhost_message_str[request]); + handled = true; break; case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY: RTE_LOG(DEBUG, VHOST_CONFIG, "Processing %s succeeded and needs reply.\n", vhost_message_str[request]); send_vhost_reply(fd, &msg); + handled = true; + break; + default: break; } - } else { - RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, - "Requested invalid message type %d.\n", request); - ret = RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR; } skip_to_post_handle: if (ret != RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR && dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle) { - ret = (*dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle)( - dev->vid, (void *)&msg); - if (ret == RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR) - goto skip_to_reply; - else if (ret == RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY) + ret = (*dev->extern_ops.post_msg_handle)(dev->vid, + (void *)&msg); + switch (ret) { + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_REPLY: send_vhost_reply(fd, &msg); + /* Fall-through */ + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR: + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_OK: + handled = true; + case RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_NOT_HANDLED: + default: + break; + } } -skip_to_reply: if (unlock_required) vhost_user_unlock_all_queue_pairs(dev); + /* If message was not handled at this stage, treat it as an error */ + if (!handled) { + RTE_LOG(ERR, VHOST_CONFIG, + "vhost message (req: %d) was not handled.\n", request); + ret = RTE_VHOST_MSG_RESULT_ERR; + } + /* * If the request required a reply that was already sent, * this optional reply-ack won't be sent as the