Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM: Windows 64-bit troubles with user space irqchip

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

On 2011-02-02 17:29, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:52:11PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>> On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>> On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>>  On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>>>>>  On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>  On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>   On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>    Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>   Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
>>>>>>>>>>>   Screen (Stop 0x000000b8).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   Userspace APIC is broken since it may run with an outdated cr8, does
>>>>>>>>>>   reverting 27a4f7976d5 help?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Can you elaborate on what is broken? The way hw/apic.c maintains the
>>>>>>>>>  tpr? Would it make sense to compare this against the in-kernel model? Or
>>>>>>>>>  do you mean something else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  The problem, IIRC, was that we look up the TPR but it may already have
>>>>>>>>  been changed by the running vcpu.  Not 100% sure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  If that is indeed the problem then the fix would be to process the APIC
>>>>>>>>  in vcpu context (which is what the kernel does - we set a bit in the IRR
>>>>>>>>  and all further processing is synchronous).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  You mean: user space changes the tpr value while the vcpu is in KVM_RUN,
>>>>>>>  then we return from the kernel and overwrite the tpr in the apic with
>>>>>>>  the vcpu's view, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, probably rather that there is a discrepancy between tpr and irr.
>>>>>> The latter is changed asynchronously /wrt to the vcpu, the former /wrt
>>>>>> the user space device model.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet, both are synchronized via qemu_mutex.  So we're still missing 
>>>>> something in this picture.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Run apic_set_irq on the vcpu?
>>>>>
>>>>> static void apic_set_irq(APICState *s, int vector_num, int trigger_mode)
>>>>> {
>>>>>      apic_irq_delivered += !get_bit(s->irr, vector_num);
>>>>>
>>>>>      trace_apic_set_irq(apic_irq_delivered);
>>>>>
>>>>>      set_bit(s->irr, vector_num);
>>>>>
>>>>> This is even more async with kernel irqchip
>>>>>
>>>>>      if (trigger_mode)
>>>>>          set_bit(s->tmr, vector_num);
>>>>>      else
>>>>>          reset_bit(s->tmr, vector_num);
>>>>>
>>>>> This is protected by qemu_mutex
>>>>>
>>>>>      apic_update_irq(s);
>>>>>
>>>>> This will be run the next time the vcpu exits, via apic_get_interrupt().
>>>>
>>>> The decision to pend an IRQ (and potentially kick the vcpu) takes place
>>>> immediately in acip_update_irq. And it is based on current irr as well
>>>> as tpr. But we update again when user space returns with a new value.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you check whether reverting that commit helps?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just did so, and I can no longer reproduce the problem. Hmm...
>>>>
>>> If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
>>> one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should be
>>> handled, arrives?
>>
>> I'm not yet confident about the logic of the kernel patch: mov to cr8 is
>> serializing. If the guest raises the tpr and then signals this with a
>> succeeding, non vm-exiting instruction to the other vcpus, one of those
>> could inject an interrupt with a higher priority than the previous tpr,
>> but a lower one than current tpr. QEMU user space would accept this
>> interrupt - and would likely surprise the guest. Do I miss something?
>>
> Injection happens by vcpu thread on cpu entry:
> run->request_interrupt_window = kvm_arch_try_push_interrupts(env);
> and tpr is synced on vcpu exit, so I do not yet see how what you describe
> above may happen since during injection vcpu should see correct tpr.

Hmm, maybe this is the key: Once we call into apic_get_interrupt
(because CPU_INTERRUPT_HARD was set as described above) and we find a
pending irq below the tpr, we inject a spurious vector instead.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux