Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] KVM: x86: Refactor tsc synchronization code

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Refactor kvm_synchronize_tsc to make a new function that allows callers
> to specify TSC parameters (offset, value, nanoseconds, etc.) explicitly
> for the sake of participating in TSC synchronization.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
> ---
> +	struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> +	bool already_matched;
> +
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->arch.tsc_write_lock);
> +
> +	already_matched =
> +	       (vcpu->arch.this_tsc_generation == kvm->arch.cur_tsc_generation);
> +

...

> +	if (!matched) {
> +		/*
> +		 * We split periods of matched TSC writes into generations.
> +		 * For each generation, we track the original measured
> +		 * nanosecond time, offset, and write, so if TSCs are in
> +		 * sync, we can match exact offset, and if not, we can match
> +		 * exact software computation in compute_guest_tsc()
> +		 *
> +		 * These values are tracked in kvm->arch.cur_xxx variables.
> +		 */
> +		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_generation++;
> +		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_nsec = ns;
> +		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_write = tsc;
> +		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_offset = offset;
> +
> +		spin_lock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);
> +		kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc = 0;
> +	} else if (!already_matched) {
> +		spin_lock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);
> +		kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc++;
> +	}
> +
> +	kvm_track_tsc_matching(vcpu);
> +	spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);

This unlock is imbalanced if matched and already_matched are both true.  It's not
immediately obvious that that _can't_ happen, and if it truly can't happen then
conditionally locking is pointless (because it's not actually conditional).

The previous code took the lock unconditionally, I don't see a strong argument
to change that, e.g. holding it for a few extra cycles while kvm->arch.cur_tsc_*
are updated is unlikely to be noticable.

If you really want to delay taking the locking, you could do

	if (!matched) {
		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_generation++;
		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_nsec = ns;
		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_write = data;
		kvm->arch.cur_tsc_offset = offset;
	}

	spin_lock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);
	if (!matched)
		kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc = 0;
	else if (!already_matched)
		kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc++;
	spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);

or if you want to get greedy

	if (!matched || !already_matched) {
		spin_lock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);
		if (!matched)
			kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc = 0;
		else
			kvm->arch.nr_vcpus_matched_tsc++;
		spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.pvclock_gtod_sync_lock);
	}

Though I'm not sure the minor complexity is worth avoiding spinlock contention.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm