[PATCH v6 03/12] PCI: liveupdate: Track incoming preserved PCI devices
Samiullah Khawaja
skhawaja at google.com
Tue Jun 16 15:38:04 PDT 2026
On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 03:20:33PM -0700, David Matlack wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 1:09 PM Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja at google.com> wrote:
>>
[snip]
>>
>> Hmm.. This is interesting, so the KHO state is freed and it cannot be
>> reused. I see you already pointed out that we are putting an LUO policy
>> to say that the retry is not allowed.
>>
>> But what should be the behaviour of liveupdate in this regard? Let the
>> system boot in a normal way? This might break other subsystems as they
>> might depend on PCIe restoring state properly. Also I think some of the
>> PCIe state, like device-id, BAR addresses, ACLs etc, might be used as
>> source of truth by other components.
>>
>> For example, lets say FLB retrieve() of PCIe fails, but succeeds for
>> VFIO/IOMMU, now VFIO/IOMMU are restoring state of a device that is not
>> restored/preserved?
>>
>> Should this be considered fatal?
>
>If PCI FLB retrieve fails then there are certain things that cannot be
>guaranteed, such as BDF (B specifically) remaining constant. This
>could lead to memory corruption as the IOMMU may have live
>translations in place for those specific RequesterIDs. And, in the
>future, preserved devices may be doing P2P which depends on BARs not
>moving. If the PCI core cannot retrieve the FLB saved by the previous
>kernel, it cannot make these guarantees.
Yes, this is what I was worried about.
>
>So yeah I think you're right that PCI core should treat FLB retrieve
>as fatal and just panic.
This sounds great.
>
>> > }
>> >
>> > static void pci_flb_finish(struct liveupdate_flb_op_args *args)
>> > {
>> >- kho_restore_free(args->obj);
>> >+ struct pci_flb_incoming *incoming = args->obj;
>> >+
>> >+ xa_destroy(&incoming->xa);
>> >+ kho_restore_free(incoming->ser);
>> >+ kfree(incoming);
>> > }
>> >
>> > static struct liveupdate_flb_ops pci_liveupdate_flb_ops = {
>> >@@ -270,6 +335,91 @@ void pci_liveupdate_unpreserve(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> > }
>> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_liveupdate_unpreserve);
>> >
>> >+static struct pci_flb_incoming *pci_liveupdate_flb_get_incoming(void)
>> >+{
>> >+ struct pci_flb_incoming *incoming = NULL;
>> >+ int ret;
>> >+
>> >+ ret = liveupdate_flb_get_incoming(&pci_liveupdate_flb, (void **)&incoming);
>> >+
>> >+ /* Live Update is not enabled. */
>> >+ if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
>> >+ return NULL;
>> >+
>> >+ /* Live Update is enabled, but there is no incoming FLB data. */
>> >+ if (ret == -ENODATA)
>> >+ return NULL;
>> >+
>> >+ /*
>> >+ * Live Update is enabled and there is incoming FLB data, but none of it
>> >+ * matches pci_liveupdate_flb.compatible.
>> >+ *
>> >+ * This could mean that no PCI FLB data was passed by the previous
>> >+ * kernel, but it could also mean the previous kernel used a different
>> >+ * compatibility string (i.e. a different ABI).
>> >+ */
>> >+ if (ret == -ENOENT) {
>> >+ pr_info_once("No incoming FLB matched %s\n", pci_liveupdate_flb.compatible);
>> >+ return NULL;
>> >+ }
>> >+
>> >+ /*
>> >+ * There is incoming FLB data that matches pci_liveupdate_flb.compatible
>> >+ * but it cannot be retrieved.
>> >+ */
>> >+ if (ret) {
>> >+ WARN_ONCE(ret, "Failed to retrieve incoming FLB data\n");
>>
>> I think this should probably be considered fatal as mentioned above or
>> the caller of this function should get an error so it can fail. I think
>> retrievel of preserved state should generally not fail unless there is
>> memory corruption or ABI is incompatible.
>
>Yeah. I think I will just call panic() here to cover all cases.
We have an luo specific panic macro/function that you can use.
luo_restore_fail()
>
>> >+ return NULL;
>> >+ }
>> >+
>> >+ return incoming;
>> >+}
>> >+
>>
>> [snip]
>> >+
>> >+static inline bool pci_liveupdate_is_incoming(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> >+{
>> >+ return false;
>> >+}
>> > #endif
>> >
>> > #endif /* LINUX_PCI_LIVEUPDATE_H */
>> >--
>> >2.54.0.746.g67dd491aae-goog
>> >
>>
>> Sami
More information about the kexec
mailing list