Skip to content

DO NOT MERGE test #5264

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bchalios
Copy link
Contributor

Changes

...

Reason

...

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • I have read and understand CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkstyle to verify that the PR passes the
    automated style checks.
  • I have described what is done in these changes, why they are needed, and
    how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
  • I have updated any relevant documentation (both in code and in the docs)
    in the PR.
  • I have mentioned all user-facing changes in CHANGELOG.md.
  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • When making API changes, I have followed the
    Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • I have tested all new and changed functionalities in unit tests and/or
    integration tests.
  • I have linked an issue to every new TODO.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

ShadowCurse and others added 10 commits June 13, 2025 15:40
The `max_size` field is public, so no need for a getter.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
Add a validation of the queue size set by the guest.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
The size of queue set by the driver must be always less or equal to the
queue size in FC. The check for it now is done in `initialize` call.
This removes the need for `actual_size` function.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
Currently block device has a guest notification logic
inside it's request processing loop. This can create a
situation when guest can continuously add more requests to the
queue, making the whole request processing loop arbitrary long.
This is an issue, since it block any other IO from being processed.

The solution is to simply notify guest one time, after all current
requests are processed.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
VIRTIO spec states:
```
After the device writes a descriptor index into the used ring:
  If the idx field in the used ring (which determined where that
  descriptor index was placed) was equal to used_event, the device
  MUST send a notification.
```
The current implementation does not follow this very precisely. It
bumps used ring index when new descriptors are added to the used
ring. But the check if the notification is needed is postponed to
later processing stage.
To be more VIRTIO spec compliant simply move the logic for updating
the used ring index into the later processing stage as well, just
before the check if the notification should be send.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
usize cannot be negative

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
Fix a typo in a test comment

Signed-off-by: Babis Chalios <bchalios@amazon.es>
Firecracker IO is software emulated by the VMM thread of the Firecracker
process. This is a single thread so it could be the case that a single
device can starve other devices. This could happen if a guest keeps
adding descriptors in a queue while we are processing it. Our emulation
logic should include railguards against such behaviour. Add a test that
verifies that this is the case.

Signed-off-by: Babis Chalios <bchalios@amazon.es>
Signed-off-by: Babis Chalios <bchalios@amazon.es>
Signed-off-by: Babis Chalios <bchalios@amazon.es>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 17, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.96154% with 25 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.85%. Comparing base (266599a) to head (e0d8bc9).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/block/virtio/device.rs 75.00% 9 Missing ⚠️
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/vsock/device.rs 62.50% 9 Missing ⚠️
...m/src/devices/virtio/block/virtio/event_handler.rs 50.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/net/event_handler.rs 50.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/mmio.rs 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/queue.rs 94.73% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5264   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.84%   82.85%           
=======================================
  Files         250      250           
  Lines       26967    26980   +13     
=======================================
+ Hits        22342    22355   +13     
  Misses       4625     4625           
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-c5n.metal 83.29% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
5.10-m5n.metal 83.29% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
5.10-m6a.metal 82.50% <75.96%> (-0.06%) ⬇️
5.10-m6g.metal 79.12% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
5.10-m6i.metal 83.27% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
5.10-m7a.metal-48xl 82.48% <75.96%> (?)
5.10-m7g.metal 79.12% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
5.10-m7i.metal-24xl 83.24% <75.96%> (?)
5.10-m7i.metal-48xl 83.24% <75.96%> (?)
5.10-m8g.metal-24xl 79.12% <75.96%> (?)
5.10-m8g.metal-48xl 79.11% <75.96%> (?)
6.1-c5n.metal 83.33% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
6.1-m5n.metal 83.33% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
6.1-m6a.metal 82.54% <75.96%> (-0.06%) ⬇️
6.1-m6g.metal 79.11% <75.96%> (-0.06%) ⬇️
6.1-m6i.metal 83.33% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
6.1-m7a.metal-48xl 82.53% <75.96%> (?)
6.1-m7g.metal 79.12% <75.96%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
6.1-m7i.metal-24xl 83.34% <75.96%> (?)
6.1-m7i.metal-48xl 83.34% <75.96%> (?)
6.1-m8g.metal-24xl 79.10% <75.96%> (?)
6.1-m8g.metal-48xl 79.12% <75.96%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants