On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 05:16:44PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
>
> Summary edit
>
> > KVM: arm/arm64: Require VCPU threads to turn them self off
>
> themselves
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:46:54AM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > To avoid a race between turning VCPUs off and turning them on, make sure
> > that only the VCPU threat itself turns off the VCPU. When other threads
> > want to turn of a VCPU, they now do this via a request.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.d...@arm.com>
> > Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 ++
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 ++
> > virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 8 ++++++--
> > virt/kvm/arm/psci.c | 11 ++---------
> > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > index 50e89869178a..b1cfae222441 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@
> > KVM_ARCH_REQ_FLAGS(0, KVM_REQUEST_WAIT | KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP)
> > #define KVM_REQ_IRQ_PENDING KVM_ARCH_REQ(1)
> > #define KVM_REQ_VCPU_RESET KVM_ARCH_REQ(2)
> > +#define KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF \
> > + KVM_ARCH_REQ_FLAGS(3, KVM_REQUEST_WAIT | KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP)
> >
> > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(userspace_irqchip_in_use);
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > index da3fc7324d68..d43b13421987 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@
> > KVM_ARCH_REQ_FLAGS(0, KVM_REQUEST_WAIT | KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP)
> > #define KVM_REQ_IRQ_PENDING KVM_ARCH_REQ(1)
> > #define KVM_REQ_VCPU_RESET KVM_ARCH_REQ(2)
> > +#define KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF \
> > + KVM_ARCH_REQ_FLAGS(3, KVM_REQUEST_WAIT | KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP)
> >
> > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(userspace_irqchip_in_use);
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> > index 9c486fad3f9f..785076176814 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> > @@ -404,8 +404,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >
> > static void vcpu_power_off(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > {
> > - vcpu->arch.power_off = true;
> > - kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SLEEP, vcpu);
> > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF, vcpu);
> > kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
> > }
>
> I think we should leave this function alone. Otherwise if userspace sets
> the MP state to STOPPED and then queries the state before the vcpu
> has a chance to manage its vcpu requests, the state will still indicate
> RUNNBLE. The same goes for a query right after doing a vcpu init.
>
We can't leave this alone, because that could lead to userspace racing
with two PSCI_VCPU_ON requests which could then both enter the critical
section gated only by the cmpxchg in kvm_psci_vcpu_on.
But we could do something like this (completely untested):
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
index 1e3195155860..538b5eb9d920 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
@@ -404,6 +404,17 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
static void vcpu_power_off(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
+ enum vcpu_power_state old_power_state;
+
+ /*
+ * Set power_state directly to reflect the power state back to user
+ * space even when the VCPU thread has not had a chance to run, but
+ * only if this doesn't accidentally allow interleaved PSCI_VCPU_ON
+ * requests.
+ */
+ old_power_state = cmpxchg(&vcpu->arch.power_state,
+ KVM_ARM_VCPU_ON,
+ KVM_ARM_VCPU_OFF);
kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF, vcpu);
kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
}
> >
> > @@ -646,6 +645,11 @@ static void check_vcpu_requests(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_SLEEP, vcpu))
> > vcpu_req_sleep(vcpu);
> >
> > + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF, vcpu)) {
> > + vcpu->arch.power_off = true;
> > + vcpu_req_sleep(vcpu);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_VCPU_RESET, vcpu))
> > kvm_reset_vcpu(vcpu);
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/psci.c b/virt/kvm/arm/psci.c
> > index b9cff1d4b06d..20255319e193 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/psci.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/psci.c
> > @@ -97,9 +97,7 @@ static unsigned long kvm_psci_vcpu_suspend(struct
> > kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >
> > static void kvm_psci_vcpu_off(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > {
> > - vcpu->arch.power_off = true;
> > - kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SLEEP, vcpu);
> > - kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
> > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_VCPU_OFF, vcpu);
> > }
>
> This was currently fine since it implements CPU_OFF which only applies to
> the calling vcpu, but there's also no reason not to change it to be
> consistent with the below change
>
Same problem as above, we don't want two VCPUs to be messing with a
target VCPU state at the same time.
Thanks,
Christoffer
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
