Re: [UPDATED PATCH v3 10/52] arm, kvm: Fix CPU hotplug callback registration
From: Christoffer Dall <hidden>
Date: 2014-03-18 22:08:12
Also in:
kvm, linux-arch, linux-arm-kernel, linux-pm, lkml
On 18 March 2014 03:23, Srivatsa S. Bhat [off-list ref] wrote:
On 03/15/2014 12:40 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:quoted
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:13:29AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:quoted
On 03/13/2014 04:51 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:quoted
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 02:05:38AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:quoted
Subsystems that want to register CPU hotplug callbacks, as well as perform initialization for the CPUs that are already online, often do it as shown below:[...]quoted
quoted
quoted
Just so we're clear, the existing code was simply racy as not prone to deadlocks, right? This makes it clear that the test above for compatible CPUs can be quite easily evaded by using CPU hotplug, but we don't really have a good solution for handling that yet... Hmmm, grumble grumble, I guess if you hotplug unsupported CPUs on a KVM/ARM system for now, stuff will break.In this particular case, there was no deadlock possibility, rather the existing code had insufficient synchronization against CPU hotplug. init_hyp_mode() would invoke cpu_init_hyp_mode() on currently online CPUs using on_each_cpu(). If a CPU came online after this point and before calling register_cpu_notifier(), that CPU would remain uninitialized because this subsystem would miss the hot-online event. This patch fixes this bug and also uses the new synchronization method (instead of get/put_online_cpus()) to ensure that we don't deadlock with CPU hotplug.Yes, that was my conclusion as well. Thanks for clarifying. (It could be noted in the commit message as well if you should feel so inclined).Please find the patch with updated changelog (and your Ack) below. (No changes in code).
perfect, thanks!
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Srivatsa S. Bhat <redacted> Subject: [PATCH] arm, kvm: Fix CPU hotplug callback registration Subsystems that want to register CPU hotplug callbacks, as well as perform initialization for the CPUs that are already online, often do it as shown below: get_online_cpus(); for_each_online_cpu(cpu) init_cpu(cpu); register_cpu_notifier(&foobar_cpu_notifier); put_online_cpus(); This is wrong, since it is prone to ABBA deadlocks involving the cpu_add_remove_lock and the cpu_hotplug.lock (when running concurrently with CPU hotplug operations). Instead, the correct and race-free way of performing the callback registration is: cpu_notifier_register_begin(); for_each_online_cpu(cpu) init_cpu(cpu); /* Note the use of the double underscored version of the API */ __register_cpu_notifier(&foobar_cpu_notifier); cpu_notifier_register_done(); In the existing arm kvm code, there is no synchronization with CPU hotplug to avoid missing the hotplug events that might occur after invoking init_hyp_mode() and before calling register_cpu_notifier(). Fix this bug and also use the new synchronization method (instead of get/put_online_cpus()) to ensure that we don't deadlock with CPU hotplug. Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org> Cc: Russell King <redacted> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <redacted> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <redacted> --- arch/arm/kvm/arm.c | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c index bd18bb8..f0e50a0 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c@@ -1051,21 +1051,26 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque) } } + cpu_notifier_register_begin(); + err = init_hyp_mode(); if (err) goto out_err; - err = register_cpu_notifier(&hyp_init_cpu_nb); + err = __register_cpu_notifier(&hyp_init_cpu_nb); if (err) { kvm_err("Cannot register HYP init CPU notifier (%d)\n", err); goto out_err; } + cpu_notifier_register_done(); + hyp_cpu_pm_init(); kvm_coproc_table_init(); return 0; out_err: + cpu_notifier_register_done(); return err; }