All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Store LPIs in an xarray
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 17:24:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <86wmqz2gm5.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f6a4587c-1db1-d477-5e6c-93dd603a11ec@linux.dev>

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 16:30:24 +0000,
Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev> wrote:
> 
> On 2024/2/17 02:41, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > Using a linked-list for LPIs is less than ideal as it of course requires
> > iterative searches to find a particular entry. An xarray is a better
> > data structure for this use case, as it provides faster searches and can
> > still handle a potentially sparse range of INTID allocations.
> > 
> > Start by storing LPIs in an xarray, punting usage of the xarray to a
> > subsequent change.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
> 
> [..]
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
> > index db2a95762b1b..c126014f8395 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c
> > @@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ void __vgic_put_lpi_locked(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
> >  		return;
> >   	list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
> > +	xa_erase(&dist->lpi_xa, irq->intid);
> 
> We can get here *after* grabbing the vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock (e.g.,
> vgic_flush_pending_lpis()/vgic_put_irq()).  And as according to vGIC's
> "Locking order", we should disable interrupts before taking the xa_lock
> in xa_erase() and we would otherwise see bad things like deadlock..
> 
> It's not a problem before patch #10, where we drop the lpi_list_lock and
> start taking the xa_lock with interrupts enabled.  Consider switching to
> use xa_erase_irq() instead?

But does it actually work? xa_erase_irq() uses spin_lock_irq(),
followed by spin_unlock_irq(). So if we were already in interrupt
context, we would end-up reenabling interrupts. At least, this should
be the irqsave version.

The question is whether we manipulate LPIs (in the get/put sense) on
the back of an interrupt handler (like we do for the timer). It isn't
obvious to me that it is the case, but I haven't spent much time
staring at this code recently.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-20 17:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-16 18:41 [PATCH v3 00/10] KVM: arm64: Avoid serializing LPI get() / put() Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Store LPIs in an xarray Oliver Upton
2024-02-20 16:30   ` Zenghui Yu
2024-02-20 17:15     ` Oliver Upton
2024-02-21  5:11       ` Zenghui Yu
2024-02-21  5:13         ` Oliver Upton
2024-02-20 17:24     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2024-02-20 17:43       ` Oliver Upton
2024-02-20 17:53         ` Marc Zyngier
2024-02-20 17:57           ` Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Use xarray to find LPI in vgic_get_lpi() Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] KVM: arm64: vgic-v3: Iterate the xarray to find pending LPIs Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Walk the LPI xarray in vgic_copy_lpi_list() Oliver Upton
2024-02-18  8:46   ` Zenghui Yu
2024-02-18 10:28     ` Marc Zyngier
2024-02-18 18:05       ` Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Get rid of the LPI linked-list Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Use atomics to count LPIs Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Free LPI vgic_irq structs in an RCU-safe manner Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Rely on RCU protection in vgic_get_lpi() Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Ensure the irq refcount is nonzero when taking a ref Oliver Upton
2024-02-16 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] KVM: arm64: vgic: Don't acquire the lpi_list_lock in vgic_put_irq() Oliver Upton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=86wmqz2gm5.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    --cc=zenghui.yu@linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.