From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, kvm-ppc <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S: Call into C interrupt handlers
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:48:10 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120427054810.GC1216@drongo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335435543-19690-2-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de>
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:19:03PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> So switch the code over to call into the Linux C handlers from C code,
> speeding up everything along the way.
I have to say this patch makes me pretty uneasy. There are a few
things that look wrong to me, but more than that, it seems to me that
there would be a lot of careful thought needed to make sure that the
approach is bullet-proof.
The first thing is that you are filling in the registers, and in
particular r1, in a subroutine, so you are potentially making regs.r1
point to a stack frame that no longer exists by the time we look at it
inside do_IRQ or timer_interrupt. So, for example, a stack trace
could go completely off the rails at that point. Quite possibly gcc
will inline the kvmppc_fill_pt_regs function, which would probably
save you, but I don't think you should rely on that.
The second thing is, why do you save just r1, ip, msr, and lr? Why
those ones and no others? A performance monitor interrupt might well
decide to save all the registers away plus a stack trace, and to see
all the GPRs as 0 could be very confusing.
Thirdly, if preemption is enabled, it could well be that the interrupt
will wake up a higher priority task which should run before we
continue. On 64-bit you are probably saved by the soft_irq_enable
calls, which will (I think) call schedule() if a reschedule is
pending, but on 32-bit soft_irq_enable does nothing.
Fourthly, as Ben said, you should be setting regs->trap.
Have you measured a performance improvement with this patch? If so
how big was it?
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-27 5:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-26 10:19 [PATCH 1/2] PPC: Export some interrupt handlers Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 10:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S: Call into C " Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 21:45 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 22:24 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 23:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 23:30 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 23:37 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 23:50 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 0:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-26 21:54 ` Scott Wood
2012-04-26 22:26 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-26 22:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-04-27 5:48 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2012-04-27 11:23 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 14:19 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 16:37 ` Scott Wood
2012-04-27 16:54 ` Alexander Graf
2012-04-27 22:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=20120427054810.GC1216@drongo \
--to=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox