From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7545EC54E58 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.696265.1087033 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rnERk-0006om-J8; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:10:48 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 696265.1087033; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:10:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rnERk-0006of-G9; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:10:48 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 696265; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:10:46 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rnERi-0006mF-Tm for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:10:46 +0000 Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id e61019c7-e762-11ee-a1ee-f123f15fe8a2; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:10:44 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-414700cffd6so5633725e9.1 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 02:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([85.31.135.62]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k4-20020adfe3c4000000b0033e48db23bdsm16685413wrm.100.2024.03.21.02.10.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Mar 2024 02:10:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: e61019c7-e762-11ee-a1ee-f123f15fe8a2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=citrix.com; s=google; t=1711012244; x=1711617044; darn=lists.xenproject.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dxyRfSAZc2eKJn/fIAN0WDRa0aI5LU+mk7Q5QdRfDfg=; b=fVWBFhnMn3SbV5Az2jfxUc74WqJRNppPz0ZqhWK6lf/LoZ/dI7xiQAP4gjemefG75Q 8yNTKBrhEu6wNMnU+QYvRSBYb4v5lFcx9lhkpRdakOYTDLQiIEImuwww6iMRq/m0Abzw BoeQF+jbW2gmX4Eu0lP5gbs7W1W6RlweoswVk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711012244; x=1711617044; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dxyRfSAZc2eKJn/fIAN0WDRa0aI5LU+mk7Q5QdRfDfg=; b=IEjorjOTlEj3lxKP7R6hnmDsBIi6qrwVIYFINdXs4D9QIr+muTUYf/1vqnqBj6i3xl 1QPtes34iYq6hF4FzmgH6S0mZlnHjM5BbyLZP9MDh31c46k4hEBE+/s0KrY8oMcuFW85 br09z/7g0573wZqjMaRIcPkMYQWZ+czVQvinlABx6YLsgsnY7u/2UjHc8xF8Or9A9GAO PKohHIzQ95sLmsk60CJTSl6YIbSqgAQbvDFyWJGWlDWmJ9i5ZHPERCf74CEyVhft9fH4 38w2DL8hCC56xzoR7dPSFSemdbCZIxuIlMLnDPnH3t94XnR/iIqKbdHDo0nIXn+ajrSl /7Sw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUj++8YR8zHJGzkpVDukKw88nJrJ5a1uLoRWdGH3uIOciYoGDicPDhTBFVLqmpmrp/tXFLF7M66mDeNgcCyI08diEmajY7Lj4czysGZQwA= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxOmkiHdh58wq921gg+ooSFRl2xiQUWoy4AdXc2HaHqiJiHsE8O WLyTXTeolEd6g5/KYMP8W0oazVsBhxBELlak17HjXitoTnZie65yjahu7ymX6Dw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE+dWjIJYvCHxqO43kxoTmPDBNIVJCkdwZeePaMwRgq4zDfzgeNV7sJiS4wiRcBgkzcHQqMwQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:548c:b0:413:ff06:83cd with SMTP id iv12-20020a05600c548c00b00413ff0683cdmr3359546wmb.3.1711012244261; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 02:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:10:43 +0100 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , George Dunlap , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/vcpu: relax VCPUOP_initialise restriction for non-PV vCPUs Message-ID: References: <20240320135720.68894-1-roger.pau@citrix.com> <73314dc5-0145-4aa7-a3cd-23c943235392@suse.com> <4cc5d746-a50c-4819-a56e-512abf797ef2@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4cc5d746-a50c-4819-a56e-512abf797ef2@suse.com> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 09:07:10AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 20.03.2024 17:29, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 04:09:33PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> On 20.03.2024 14:57, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > >>> There's no reason to force HVM guests to have a valid vcpu_info area when > >>> initializing a vCPU, as the vCPU can also be brought online using the local > >>> APIC, and on that path there's no requirement for vcpu_info to be setup ahead > >>> of the bring up. Note an HVM vCPU can operate normally without making use of > >>> vcpu_info. > >> > >> While I'd agree if you started with "There's no real need to force ...", I > >> still think there is a reason: If one wants to use paravirt interfaces (i.e. > >> hypercalls), they would better do so consistently. After all there's also > >> no need to use VCPUOP_initialise, yet you're not disabling its use. > >> > >> As said in reply to Andrew's reply, besides acting as a sentinel that > >> structure instance also acts as a sink for Xen accesses to a vCPU's > >> vcpu_info. By removing the check, you switch that from being a safeguard to > >> being something that actually has to be expected to be accessed. Unless > >> you've audited all uses to prove that no such access exists. > > > > I'm kind of lost in this last paragraph, how is that different than > > what currently happens when an HVM vCPU >= 32 is brought up using the > > lapic and has no vpcu_info mapped? > > I think this aspect was simply missed back at the time. And I think it > wants mentioning explicitly to justify the change. OK, I can add to the commit message: "Note an HVM vCPU can operate normally without making use of vcpu_info, and in fact does so when brought up from the local APIC." > As said in reply to Andrew, I don't think the dummy structure can be got > rid of. Nor can the checks here be (easily) removed altogether, i.e. your > change cannot (easily) be extended to PV as well. Even conditional removal > of the structure in !PV builds would first require all vcpu_info accesses > to gain a suitable conditional. Which may be undesirable, as some of these > may be deemed fast paths. I didn't intended to do this here, as replied to Andrew. If we want to get rid of the check for PV also it needs to be done in a different patch, and with a different justification and analysis. > > Also, from a quick look it seems like sites do check whether vcpu_info > > == dummy_vcpu_info, otherwise we would already be in trouble. > > Such checks exist in code managing vcpu_info, but not - afaics - in places > actually accessing it. Quite possibly, I didn't look that close TBH, since my intention was not to remove dummy_vcpu_info. I've noticed however that __update_vcpu_system_time() checks for v->vcpu_info_area.map == NULL, which is fine, but shouldn't it also check for v->vcpu_info_area.map == &dummy_vcpu_info, as it's pointless to update the vcpu system time if pointing to the dummy_vcpu_info? Thanks, Roger.