From: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
To: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mttcg/i386: Patch instruction using async_safe_* framework
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:50:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vas1uqom.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487812814-17055-1-git-send-email-bobby.prani@gmail.com>
Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com> writes:
> In mttcg, calling pause_all_vcpus() during execution from the
> generated TBs causes a deadlock if some vCPU is waiting for exclusive
> execution in start_exclusive(). Fix this by using the aync_safe_*
> framework instead of pausing vcpus for patching instructions.
>
> CC: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
> CC: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> CC: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>
> ---
> hw/i386/kvmvapic.c | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c b/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> index 82a4955..15eb39d 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> @@ -383,8 +383,7 @@ static void patch_byte(X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong addr, uint8_t byte)
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(CPU(cpu), addr, &byte, 1, 1);
> }
>
> -static void patch_call(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip,
> - uint32_t target)
> +static void patch_call(X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip, uint32_t target)
> {
> uint32_t offset;
>
> @@ -393,17 +392,74 @@ static void patch_call(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip,
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(CPU(cpu), ip + 1, (void *)&offset, sizeof(offset), 1);
> }
>
> -static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> +struct PatchInfo {
> + VAPICHandlers *handler;
> + target_ulong ip;
> +};
> +
> +static void do_patch_instruction(CPUState *cs, run_on_cpu_data data)
> {
> - CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> - CPUX86State *env = &cpu->env;
> - VAPICHandlers *handlers;
> + X86CPU *x86_cpu = X86_CPU(cs);
> + CPUX86State *env = &x86_cpu->env;
> + struct PatchInfo *info = (struct PatchInfo *) data.host_ptr;
> + VAPICHandlers *handlers = info->handler;
> + target_ulong ip = info->ip;
> uint8_t opcode[2];
> uint32_t imm32 = 0;
> target_ulong current_pc = 0;
> target_ulong current_cs_base = 0;
> uint32_t current_flags = 0;
>
> + cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(env, ¤t_pc, ¤t_cs_base,
> + ¤t_flags);
> + /* Account this instruction, because we will exit the tb.
> + This is the first instruction in the block. Therefore
> + there is no need in restoring CPU state. */
> + if (use_icount) {
> + --cs->icount_decr.u16.low;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip, opcode, sizeof(opcode), 0);
> +
> + switch (opcode[0]) {
> + case 0x89: /* mov r32 to r/m32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x50 + modrm_reg(opcode[1])); /* push reg */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> + break;
> + case 0x8b: /* mov r/m32 to r32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x90);
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> + break;
> + case 0xa1: /* mov abs to eax */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> + break;
> + case 0xa3: /* mov eax to abs */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> + break;
> + case 0xc7: /* mov imm32, r/m32 (c7/0) */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x68); /* push imm32 */
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 6, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 0);
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 1, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 1);
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> + break;
> + case 0xff: /* push r/m32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x50); /* push eax */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> + break;
> + default:
> + abort();
> + }
> +
> + g_free(info);
> +}
> +
> +static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> +{
> + CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> + VAPICHandlers *handlers;
> + uint8_t opcode[2];
> + uint32_t imm32 = 0;
> +
> if (smp_cpus == 1) {
> handlers = &s->rom_state.up;
> } else {
> @@ -411,14 +467,14 @@ static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> }
>
> if (!kvm_enabled()) {
> - cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(env, ¤t_pc, ¤t_cs_base,
> - ¤t_flags);
> - /* Account this instruction, because we will exit the tb.
> - This is the first instruction in the block. Therefore
> - there is no need in restoring CPU state. */
> - if (use_icount) {
> - --cs->icount_decr.u16.low;
> - }
> + struct PatchInfo *info = g_new(struct PatchInfo, 1);
> + const run_on_cpu_func fn = do_patch_instruction;
> + info->handler = handlers;
> + info->ip = ip;
> +
> + async_safe_run_on_cpu(cs, fn, RUN_ON_CPU_HOST_PTR(info));
> + cs->exception_index = EXCP_INTERRUPT;
> + cpu_loop_exit(cs);
So my only concern is has the path we've taken here ensured that all
registers have been updated before we leave the loop. That said we
previously called cpu_loop_exit_noexc() which has the lovely comment:
void cpu_loop_exit_noexc(CPUState *cpu)
{
/* XXX: restore cpu registers saved in host registers */
But the offloading of this work to async is the right approach.
> }
>
> pause_all_vcpus();
> @@ -428,41 +484,33 @@ static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> switch (opcode[0]) {
> case 0x89: /* mov r32 to r/m32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x50 + modrm_reg(opcode[1])); /* push reg */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> break;
> case 0x8b: /* mov r/m32 to r32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x90);
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> break;
> case 0xa1: /* mov abs to eax */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> break;
> case 0xa3: /* mov eax to abs */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> break;
> case 0xc7: /* mov imm32, r/m32 (c7/0) */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x68); /* push imm32 */
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 6, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 0);
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 1, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 1);
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> break;
> case 0xff: /* push r/m32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x50); /* push eax */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> break;
> default:
> abort();
> }
>
> resume_all_vcpus();
> -
> - if (!kvm_enabled()) {
> - /* Both tb_lock and iothread_mutex will be reset when
> - * longjmps back into the cpu_exec loop. */
> - tb_lock();
> - tb_gen_code(cs, current_pc, current_cs_base, current_flags, 1);
> - cpu_loop_exit_noexc(cs);
> - }
> }
>
> void vapic_report_tpr_access(DeviceState *dev, CPUState *cs, target_ulong ip,
--
Alex Bennée
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-23 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-23 1:20 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mttcg/i386: Patch instruction using async_safe_* framework Pranith Kumar
2017-02-23 10:50 ` Alex Bennée [this message]
2017-02-23 22:38 ` Richard Henderson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-28 5:28 Pranith Kumar
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=87vas1uqom.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/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.