Kernel KVM virtualization development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] sched/wait: Add a waitqueue helper for fully exclusive priority waiters
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 21:17:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250520191723.GI16434@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250519185514.2678456-7-seanjc@google.com>

On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 11:55:08AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Add a waitqueue helper to add a priority waiter that requires exclusive
> wakeups, i.e. that requires that it be the _only_ priority waiter.  The
> API will be used by KVM to ensure that at most one of KVM's irqfds is
> bound to a single eventfd (across the entire kernel).
> 
> Open code the helper instead of using __add_wait_queue() so that the
> common path doesn't need to "handle" impossible failures.
> 
> Note, the priority_exclusive() name is obviously confusing as the plain
> priority() API also sets WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE.  This will be remedied once
> KVM switches to add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive(), as the only other
> user of add_wait_queue_priority(), Xen's privcmd, doesn't actually operate
> in exclusive mode (more than likely, the detail was overlooked when privcmd
> copy-pasted (sorry, "was inspired by") KVM's implementation).
> 
> Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/wait.h |  2 ++
>  kernel/sched/wait.c  | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/wait.h b/include/linux/wait.h
> index 965a19809c7e..09855d819418 100644
> --- a/include/linux/wait.h
> +++ b/include/linux/wait.h
> @@ -164,6 +164,8 @@ static inline bool wq_has_sleeper(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head)
>  extern void add_wait_queue(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry);
>  extern void add_wait_queue_exclusive(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry);
>  extern void add_wait_queue_priority(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry);
> +extern int add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head,
> +					     struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry);
>  extern void remove_wait_queue(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry);
>  
>  static inline void __add_wait_queue(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry)
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/wait.c b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> index 51e38f5f4701..03252badb8e8 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/wait.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c
> @@ -47,6 +47,24 @@ void add_wait_queue_priority(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head, struct wait_queue_
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(add_wait_queue_priority);
>  
> +int add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head,
> +				      struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry)
> +{
> +	struct list_head *head = &wq_head->head;
> +
> +	wq_entry->flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE | WQ_FLAG_PRIORITY;
> +
> +	guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&wq_head->lock);
> +
> +	if (!list_empty(head) &&
> +	    (list_first_entry(head, typeof(*wq_entry), entry)->flags & WQ_FLAG_PRIORITY))
> +		return -EBUSY;
> +
> +	list_add(&wq_entry->entry, head);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(add_wait_queue_priority_exclusive);

add_wait_queue_priority() is a GPL export, leading me to believe the
whole priority thing is _GPL only, should we maintain that?

  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-20 19:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-19 18:55 [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM: Make irqfd registration globally unique Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] KVM: Use a local struct to do the initial vfs_poll() on an irqfd Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] KVM: Acquire SCRU lock outside of irqfds.lock during assignment Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] KVM: Initialize irqfd waitqueue callback when adding to the queue Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] KVM: Add irqfd to KVM's list via the vfs_poll() callback Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] KVM: Add irqfd to eventfd's waitqueue while holding irqfds.lock Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] sched/wait: Add a waitqueue helper for fully exclusive priority waiters Sean Christopherson
2025-05-20 19:17   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-05-20 20:57     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] KVM: Disallow binding multiple irqfds to an eventfd with a priority waiter Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] sched/wait: Drop WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE from add_wait_queue_priority() Sean Christopherson
2025-05-20 19:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-20 22:20     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-21 11:42       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-21 14:44         ` Michael Kelley
2025-05-21 15:05           ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-21 13:22       ` Jürgen Groß
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] KVM: Drop sanity check that per-VM list of irqfds is unique Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] KVM: selftests: Assert that eventfd() succeeds in Xen shinfo test Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] KVM: selftests: Add utilities to create eventfds and do KVM_IRQFD Sean Christopherson
2025-05-19 18:55 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] KVM: selftests: Add a KVM_IRQFD test to verify uniqueness requirements 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=20250520191723.GI16434@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --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=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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