From nobody Thu Nov 6 06:15:29 2025 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: pass (zoho.com: domain of gnu.org designates 208.118.235.17 as permitted sender) client-ip=208.118.235.17; envelope-from=qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org; helo=lists.gnu.org; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=pass (zoho.com: domain of gnu.org designates 208.118.235.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org; dmarc=fail(p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [208.118.235.17]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 153928608154228.772372975864528; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36297 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAgck-00066n-99 for importer@patchew.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:27:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44852) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAgaZ-0004vX-5o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:25:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAgaU-0001cU-4K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:25:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58458) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAgaT-0001ap-Ps for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:25:33 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58AE83082A26; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 19:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dgilbert-t530.redhat.com (ovpn-117-217.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.217]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC99D88B21; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 19:25:30 +0000 (UTC) From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:25:11 +0100 Message-Id: <20181011192513.63634-6-dgilbert@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20181011192513.63634-1-dgilbert@redhat.com> References: <20181011192513.63634-1-dgilbert@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.45]); Thu, 11 Oct 2018 19:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 5/7] vhost-user: Don't ask for reply on postcopy mem table set X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: wei@redhat.com, i.maximets@samsung.com, thuth@redhat.com, den@openvz.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+importer=patchew.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" X-ZohoMail: RDMRC_1 RSF_0 Z_629925259 SPT_0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Ilya Maximets According to documentation, NEED_REPLY_MASK should not be set for VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE request in postcopy mode. This restriction was mistakenly applied to 'reply_supported' variable, which is local and used only for non-postcopy case. CC: Dr. David Alan Gilbert Fixes: 9bb38019942c ("vhost+postcopy: Send address back to qemu") Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets Message-Id: <20181002140947.4107-1-i.maximets@samsung.com> Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert --- hw/virtio/vhost-user.c | 13 +------------ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c index ed47d645d9..e09bed0e4a 100644 --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-user.c @@ -374,8 +374,6 @@ static int vhost_user_set_mem_table_postcopy(struct vho= st_dev *dev, int fds[VHOST_MEMORY_MAX_NREGIONS]; int i, fd; size_t fd_num =3D 0; - bool reply_supported =3D virtio_has_feature(dev->protocol_features, - VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_= ACK); VhostUserMsg msg_reply; int region_i, msg_i; =20 @@ -384,10 +382,6 @@ static int vhost_user_set_mem_table_postcopy(struct vh= ost_dev *dev, .hdr.flags =3D VHOST_USER_VERSION, }; =20 - if (reply_supported) { - msg.hdr.flags |=3D VHOST_USER_NEED_REPLY_MASK; - } - if (u->region_rb_len < dev->mem->nregions) { u->region_rb =3D g_renew(RAMBlock*, u->region_rb, dev->mem->nregio= ns); u->region_rb_offset =3D g_renew(ram_addr_t, u->region_rb_offset, @@ -503,10 +497,6 @@ static int vhost_user_set_mem_table_postcopy(struct vh= ost_dev *dev, return -1; } =20 - if (reply_supported) { - return process_message_reply(dev, &msg); - } - return 0; } =20 @@ -519,8 +509,7 @@ static int vhost_user_set_mem_table(struct vhost_dev *d= ev, size_t fd_num =3D 0; bool do_postcopy =3D u->postcopy_listen && u->postcopy_fd.handler; bool reply_supported =3D virtio_has_feature(dev->protocol_features, - VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_ACK)= && - !do_postcopy; + VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_REPLY_= ACK); =20 if (do_postcopy) { /* Postcopy has enough differences that it's best done in it's own --=20 2.19.0