Re: [virtio-comment] RE: [PATCH V2 2/6] virtio: introduce SUSPEND bit in device status

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 04:21:13PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
> > > This can work, right?
> > Unfortunately no, as non atomic bitmap cannot reside in the host memory,
> as explained before, PCI and CPU supports atomic read/write. Please refer to
> PCI spec and CPU ISA.

I don't see how atomic read or write does anything useful here but maybe.
You need to explain how you are using atomics in your proposal then.


> > And whatever is in the device gets reset on device reset and/or FLR. So the dirty map detail is lost.
> > Similarly the device context is also lost on these two events triggered by guest.
> we explained before, when reset, the device should clear everything.

then migration will corrupt memory. Not great.



> > 
> > > > > As you can see, the dirty page tracking facility has a PASID for
> > > > > isolation. But still, the question is, we should better use platform
> > > > > dirty page tracking
> > > > > 
> > > > Nothing to do with PASID, as PASID is owned by the guest.
> > > It looks you don't know how PASID work.
> > > Host can setup PASID to isolate some facilities, right?
> > There are few limitations with PASID.
> > a. All platforms do not have PASID and
> As we have explained for many times, this is a basic facility,
> and the implementation is transport-specific.
> 
> We given an example of PCI implementation, and PCI support PASID, right?

Yes it's a limitation but maybe one we can live with
for this feature.  It does mean that we might need solutions
for systems without this support. virtio use is not limited
to servers or high end systems.


> > b. I explained above PASID do not work always as PASID only bifurcates DMA not the device _functionality_.
> With a PASID, a cap can be considered to be placed in another logical
> address space, which is not accessible to the guest.
> > c. PASID to be available to guest as_is what is present on the device
> host hypervisor sets the PASID, transparent to the guest.

Lingshan whenever people ask you a ton of questions in response to
your spec proposal then respose should not be to simply
answer on the mailing list and then repost without a lot of changes
since spec readers will likely have questions exactly like these
and we can not make them go and read this flame war.
And frankly, most of this TC stopped following this thread a while ago,
it seems to be going nowhere.
The response should be to add the explanation in the spec.
Look at Parav's live migration proposals with "theory of operation" chapters
for an example of how this can be done.

> > 
> > > > > Then suspend the device after guest freeze, to stabilize the device
> > > > > status, then read the status.
> > > > > 
> > > > > How can you say this does not work???
> > > > I explained above.
> > > see above