Re: Possible nohz-full/RCU issue in arm64 KVM
From: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-17 14:15:35
Also in:
kvmarm, lkml, rcu
On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 13:21 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:51:57PM +0100, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:quoted
Hi All,Hi,quoted
arm64's guest entry code does the following: int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { [...] guest_enter_irqoff(); ret = kvm_call_hyp_ret(__kvm_vcpu_run, vcpu); [...] local_irq_enable(); /* * We do local_irq_enable() before calling guest_exit() so * that if a timer interrupt hits while running the guest we * account that tick as being spent in the guest. We enable * preemption after calling guest_exit() so that if we get * preempted we make sure ticks after that is not counted as * guest time. */ guest_exit(); [...] } On a nohz-full CPU, guest_{enter,exit}() delimit an RCU extended quiescent state (EQS). Any interrupt happening between local_irq_enable() and guest_exit() should disable that EQS. Now, AFAICT all el0 interrupt handlers do the right thing if trggered in this context, but el1's won't. Is it possible to hit an el1 handler (for example __el1_irq()) there?I think you're right that the EL1 handlers can trigger here and won't exit the EQS. I'm not immediately sure what we *should* do here. What does x86 do for an IRQ taken from a guest mode? I couldn't spot any handling of that case, but I'm not familiar enough with the x86 exception model to know if I'm looking in the right place.
Well x86 has its own private KVM guest context exit function
'kvm_guest_exit_irqoff()', which allows it to do the right thing (simplifying
things):
local_irq_disable();
kvm_guest_enter_irqoff() // Inform CT, enter EQS
__vmx_kvm_run()
kvm_guest_exit_irqoff() // Inform CT, exit EQS, task still marked with PF_VCPU
/*
* Consume any pending interrupts, including the possible source of
* VM-Exit on SVM and any ticks that occur between VM-Exit and now.
* An instruction is required after local_irq_enable() to fully unblock
* interrupts on processors that implement an interrupt shadow, the
* stat.exits increment will do nicely.
*/
local_irq_enable();
++vcpu->stat.exits;
local_irq_disable();
/*
* Wait until after servicing IRQs to account guest time so that any
* ticks that occurred while running the guest are properly accounted
* to the guest. Waiting until IRQs are enabled degrades the accuracy
* of accounting via context tracking, but the loss of accuracy is
* acceptable for all known use cases.
*/
vtime_account_guest_exit(); // current->flags &= ~PF_VCPU
So I guess we should convert to x86's scheme, and maybe create another generic
guest_{enter,exit}() flavor for virtualization schemes that run with interrupts
disabled.
Note that the EL0 handlers *cannot* trigger for an exception taken from a guest. We use separate vectors while running a guest (for both VHE and nVHE modes), and from the main kernel's PoV we return from kvm_call_hyp_ret(). We can ony take IRQ from EL1 *after* that returns. We *might* need to audit the KVM vector handlers to make sure they're not dependent on RCU protection (I assume they're not, but it's possible something has leaked into the VHE code).
IIUC in the window between local_irq_enable() and guest_exit() any driver interrupt might trigger, isn't it? Regards, -- Nicolás Sáenz _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel