From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steve Rutherford <srutherford@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: Protect vCPU's "last run PID" with rwlock, not RCU
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 15:58:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZrKqrCnNpNQ_K_qi@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240802200136.329973-3-seanjc@google.com>
On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 01:01:36PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> To avoid jitter on KVM_RUN due to synchronize_rcu(), use a rwlock instead
> of RCU to protect vcpu->pid, a.k.a. the pid of the task last used to a
> vCPU. When userspace is doing M:N scheduling of tasks to vCPUs, e.g. to
> run SEV migration helper vCPUs during post-copy, the synchronize_rcu()
> needed to change the PID associated with the vCPU can stall for hundreds
> of milliseconds, which is problematic for latency sensitive post-copy
> operations.
>
> In the directed yield path, do not acquire the lock if it's contended,
> i.e. if the associated PID is changing, as that means the vCPU's task is
> already running.
>
> Reported-by: Steve Rutherford <srutherford@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 3 ++-
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++--------------
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index a33f5996ca9f..7199cb014806 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1115,7 +1115,7 @@ int __kvm_arm_vcpu_set_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> void kvm_arm_halt_guest(struct kvm *kvm);
> void kvm_arm_resume_guest(struct kvm *kvm);
>
> -#define vcpu_has_run_once(vcpu) !!rcu_access_pointer((vcpu)->pid)
> +#define vcpu_has_run_once(vcpu) (!!READ_ONCE((vcpu)->pid))
>
> #ifndef __KVM_NVHE_HYPERVISOR__
> #define kvm_call_hyp_nvhe(f, ...) \
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index 689e8be873a7..d6f4e8b2b44c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -342,7 +342,8 @@ struct kvm_vcpu {
> #ifndef __KVM_HAVE_ARCH_WQP
> struct rcuwait wait;
> #endif
> - struct pid __rcu *pid;
> + struct pid *pid;
> + rwlock_t pid_lock;
> int sigset_active;
> sigset_t sigset;
> unsigned int halt_poll_ns;
Adding yet another lock is never exciting, but this looks fine. Can you
nest this lock inside of the vcpu->mutex acquisition in
kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu() so lockdep gets the picture?
> @@ -4466,7 +4469,7 @@ static long kvm_vcpu_ioctl(struct file *filp,
> r = -EINVAL;
> if (arg)
> goto out;
> - oldpid = rcu_access_pointer(vcpu->pid);
> + oldpid = vcpu->pid;
It'd be good to add a comment here about how this is guarded by the
vcpu->mutex, as Steve points out.
--
Thanks,
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-06 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-02 20:01 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: Protect vCPU's PID with a rwlock Sean Christopherson
2024-08-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: Return '0' directly when there's no task to yield to Sean Christopherson
2024-08-02 20:01 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: Protect vCPU's "last run PID" with rwlock, not RCU Sean Christopherson
2024-08-02 20:28 ` Steve Rutherford
2024-08-02 20:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-02 21:27 ` Steve Rutherford
2024-08-06 22:58 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2024-08-06 23:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-09 18:05 ` Oliver Upton
2024-08-13 2:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-06 22:59 ` [PATCH 0/2] KVM: Protect vCPU's PID with a rwlock Oliver Upton
2024-10-31 19:51 ` Sean Christopherson
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=ZrKqrCnNpNQ_K_qi@linux.dev \
--to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=srutherford@google.com \
/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.