public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>,
	isaku.yamahata@intel.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/19] KVM: x86: Drop kvm_user_return_msr_cpu_online()
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 10:49:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220901174953.GH2711697@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YxC96HujrBAwlgK0@google.com>

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 02:12:56PM +0000,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022, Chao Gao wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 05:01:16AM -0700, isaku.yamahata@intel.com wrote:
> > >From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
> > >
> > >KVM/X86 uses user return notifier to switch MSR for guest or user space.
> > >Snapshot host values on CPU online, change MSR values for guest, and
> > >restore them on returning to user space.  The current code abuses
> > >kvm_arch_hardware_enable() which is called on kvm module initialization or
> > >CPU online.
> > >
> > >Remove such the abuse of kvm_arch_hardware_enable by capturing the host
> > >value on the first change of the MSR value to guest VM instead of CPU
> > >online.
> > >
> > >Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> > >Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
> > >---
> > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > >index 205ebdc2b11b..16104a2f7d8e 100644
> > >--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > >+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > >@@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ struct kvm_user_return_msrs {
> > > 	struct kvm_user_return_msr_values {
> > > 		u64 host;
> > > 		u64 curr;
> > >+		bool initialized;
> > > 	} values[KVM_MAX_NR_USER_RETURN_MSRS];
> > 
> > The benefit of having an "initialized" state for each user return MSR on
> > each CPU is small. A per-cpu state looks suffice. With it, you can keep
> > kvm_user_return_msr_cpu_online() and simply call the function from
> > kvm_set_user_return_msr() if initialized is false on current CPU.
> 
> Yep, a per-CPU flag is I intended.  This is the completely untested patch that's
> sitting in a development branch of mine.

With the following fix, it worked.  I'll replace this patch with yours.

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 205ebdc2b11b..0e200fe44b35 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -9212,7 +9217,12 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
                return -ENOMEM;
        }
 
-       user_return_msrs = alloc_percpu(struct kvm_user_return_msrs);
+       /*
+        * __GFP_ZERO to ensure user_return_msrs.values[].initialized = false.
+        * See kvm_user_return_msr_init_cpu().
+        */
+       user_return_msrs = alloc_percpu_gfp(struct kvm_user_return_msrs,
+                                           GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
        if (!user_return_msrs) {
                printk(KERN_ERR "kvm: failed to allocate percpu kvm_user_return_msrs\n");
                r = -ENOMEM;

-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-01 17:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-30 12:01 [PATCH v2 00/19] KVM hardware enable/disable reorganize isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 01/19] KVM: x86: Drop kvm_user_return_msr_cpu_online() isaku.yamahata
2022-09-01  5:29   ` Chao Gao
2022-09-01 14:12     ` Sean Christopherson
2022-09-01 17:49       ` Isaku Yamahata [this message]
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 02/19] KVM: x86: Use this_cpu_ptr() instead of per_cpu_ptr(smp_processor_id()) isaku.yamahata
2022-09-01  5:56   ` Chao Gao
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 03/19] KVM: x86: Move check_processor_compatibility from init ops to runtime ops isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 04/19] Partially revert "KVM: Pass kvm_init()'s opaque param to additional arch funcs" isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 22:39   ` Huang, Kai
2022-09-01 18:01     ` Isaku Yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 05/19] KVM: Rename and move CPUHP_AP_KVM_STARTING to ONLINE section isaku.yamahata
2022-09-01  5:59   ` Chao Gao
2022-09-01  6:18   ` Chao Gao
2022-09-01 10:58     ` Huang, Kai
2022-09-01 16:52       ` Isaku Yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 06/19] KVM: Drop kvm_count_lock and instead protect kvm_usage_count with kvm_lock isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 07/19] KVM: Add arch hooks for PM events with empty stub isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 08/19] KVM: x86: Move TSC fixup logic to KVM arch resume callback isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 09/19] KVM: Add arch hook when VM is added/deleted isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 10/19] KVM: Move out KVM arch PM hooks and hardware enable/disable logic isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 11/19] KVM: kvm_arch.c: Remove _nolock post fix isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 12/19] KVM: kvm_arch.c: Remove a global variable, hardware_enable_failed isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 13/19] KVM: Do processor compatibility check on cpu online and resume isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 14/19] KVM: x86: Duplicate arch callbacks related to pm events isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 15/19] KVM: Eliminate kvm_arch_post_init_vm() isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 16/19] KVM: x86: Delete kvm_arch_hardware_enable/disable() isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 17/19] KVM: Add config to not compile kvm_arch.c isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 18/19] RFC: KVM: x86: Remove cpus_hardware_enabled and related sanity check isaku.yamahata
2022-08-30 12:01 ` [PATCH v2 19/19] RFC: KVM: " isaku.yamahata

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=20220901174953.GH2711697@ls.amr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=isaku.yamahata@gmail.com \
    --cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=isaku.yamahata@intel.com \
    --cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=will@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