From: "Mian M. Hamayun" <mian-muhammad.hamayun@imag.fr>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Can we force a KVM VCPU in Guest Mode to Exit to User Mode From User Mode ?
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:39:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50114898.5080402@imag.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50111F59.9080103@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6332 bytes --]
On 07/26/2012 12:43 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 07/26/2012 01:34 PM, Mian M. Hamayun wrote:
>> On 07/26/2012 12:06 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 07/26/2012 12:38 PM, Mian M. Hamayun wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> This mechanism 'seems' to work fine when both vcpu threads are in User
>>>> Mode. But when booting an SMP Guest, the boot processor (BSP) initially
>>>> executes the bootstrap code while the non-boot processors (APs) are
>>>> waiting for initial INIT-SIPI-SIPI messages.
>>>>
>>>> What I fail to understand is if an AP is currently waiting for an INIT
>>>> signal, and we call the "run_on_cpu" function above for this cpu, it
>>>> blocks the whole system, as the AP is in Guest mode and cannot call the
>>>> "flush_queued_work" and the BSP is waiting for this to happen.
>>>>
>>>> How can we resolve this deadlock ? Is there a way to force the AP to
>>>> quit the Guest Mode, by using some specific mechanism from the User
>>>> mode ?
>>> When a vcpu is waiting for an INIT, it still responds to signals and
>>> will return to userspace if a signal is received. Did you observe
>>> something different?
>>>
>> Hi Avi,
>>
>> So it means that when we execute the following:
>>
>> err = pthread_kill(env->thread, SIG_IPI);
>>
>> then this VCPU thread should wake-up and force the VCPU to quit the
>> guest mode ?
> Yes.
>
>> But I am not getting this behavior as the VCPU thread remains blocked in
>> Guest Mode.
>> What could be wrong here ?
>>
> Perhaps signals are blocked?
No, thats not the case.
>
> Can you share your reproducer?
Actually its based on kvm-tool and I have integrated some code from
qemu-kvm to add debug support to kvm-tool.
I don't have a smaller example that could reproduce the same problem.
>
>> Many Thanks,
>> Hamayun
>>
>> P.S. Please see the following trace; As it might help understanding the
>> problem. (thread 2 is the BSP and thread 3 is for AP)
>>
>> run_on_cpu: Kicked CPU#1 ... Waiting on qemu_work_cond
>>
>> Program received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.
>> ^C
>> Program received signal SIGINT, Interrupt.
>> 0xb7fdd424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> (gdb) info threads
>> Id Target Id Frame
>> 3 Thread 0xaea17b40 (LWP 2843) "arch.x" 0xb7fdd424 in
>> __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> 2 Thread 0xaf218b40 (LWP 2842) "arch.x" 0xb7fdd424 in
>> __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> * 1 Thread 0xb7359940 (LWP 2822) "arch.x" 0xb7fdd424 in
>> __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> (gdb) thread 2
>> [Switching to thread 2 (Thread 0xaf218b40 (LWP 2842))]
>> #0 0xb7fdd424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> (gdb) bt
>> #0 0xb7fdd424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> #1 0xb7f7096b in pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () from
>> /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
>> #2 0xb7fc5715 in qemu_cond_wait (cond=0xb7fda640, lock=0xb7fda670) at
>> gdb_srv_arch.c:578
>> #3 0xb7fc5981 in run_on_cpu (env=0x8465818, func=0xb7fc5417
>> <kvm_invoke_set_guest_debug>, data=0xaf20fe50) at gdb_srv_arch.c:782
>> #4 0xb7fc5b90 in kvm_update_guest_debug (env=0x8465818,
>> reinject_trap=0) at gdb_srv_arch.c:863
>> #5 0xb7fc5ef1 in kvm_remove_all_breakpoints (current_env=0x8465418) at
>> gdb_srv_arch.c:983
>> #6 0xb7fc2e0a in gdb_breakpoint_remove_all (env=0x8465418) at
>> gdb_srv.c:369
>> #7 0xb7fc3139 in gdb_handle_packet (s=0x80ac3e0, line_buf=0x80ac3fc
>> "?") at gdb_srv.c:497
>> #8 0xb7fc439c in gdb_read_byte (s=0x80ac3e0, ch=102) at gdb_srv.c:830
>> #9 0xb7fc4522 in gdb_loop (env=0x8465418) at gdb_srv.c:878
>> #10 0xb7fc4621 in gdb_srv_handle_debug (env=0x8465418) at gdb_srv.c:924
>> #11 0xb7fc5265 in kvm_arch_handle_debug (env=0x8465418) at
>> gdb_srv_arch.c:424
>> #12 0xb7fac3a8 in kvm_cpu__start (cpu=0x8465418) at kvm-cpu.c:588
>> #13 0xb7fc6521 in kvm_cpu_thread (arg=0x8465418) at libkvm-main.c:276
>> #14 0xb7f6cd4c in start_thread () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
>> #15 0xb7d7bace in clone () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
>> (gdb) thread 3
>> [Switching to thread 3 (Thread 0xaea17b40 (LWP 2843))]
>> #0 0xb7fdd424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> (gdb) bt
>> #0 0xb7fdd424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> #1 0xb7d73869 in ioctl () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
>> #2 0xb7fabe9c in kvm_cpu__run (vcpu=0x8465818) at kvm-cpu.c:429
>> #3 0xb7fac376 in kvm_cpu__start (cpu=0x8465818) at kvm-cpu.c:578
>> #4 0xb7fc6521 in kvm_cpu_thread (arg=0x8465818) at libkvm-main.c:276
>> #5 0xb7f6cd4c in start_thread () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
>> #6 0xb7d7bace in clone () from /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
>>
> Are you sure thread 3 did not receive the signal?
The thread 3 does actually receives the signal, but the order is not right.
As the BSP (Thread 2) starts, it locks the "qemu_global_mutex" and
releases it only when it calls the "run_on_cpu" function and starts
waiting on "qemu_work_cond".
The AP (Thread 3) wakes-up due to the SIG_IPI signal from thread 2,
acquires the lock on "qemu_global_mutex" and enters the guest mode.
(This is the deadlock case)
If we do not lock the "qemu_global_mutex" in each cpu thread at the
beginning, and only lock it when we quit the guest mode, the problem
seems to go away, as now we get the SIG_IPI when the Thread 3 is
actually in the guest mode and it quits to user mode.
But I am not sure if this is the right way to do it, as in qemu-kvm we
_always_ start each cpu thread by locking the "qemu_global_mutex".
i.e.
static void *qemu_kvm_cpu_thread_fn(void *arg)
{
CPUArchState *env = arg;
int r;
qemu_mutex_lock(&qemu_global_mutex);
qemu_thread_get_self(env->thread);
env->thread_id = qemu_get_thread_id();
cpu_single_env = env;
r = kvm_init_vcpu(env);
if (r < 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "kvm_init_vcpu failed: %s\n", strerror(-r));
exit(1);
}
qemu_kvm_init_cpu_signals(env);
/* signal CPU creation */
env->created = 1;
qemu_cond_signal(&qemu_cpu_cond);
while (1) {
if (cpu_can_run(env)) {
r = kvm_cpu_exec(env);
if (r == EXCP_DEBUG) {
cpu_handle_guest_debug(env);
}
}
qemu_kvm_wait_io_event(env);
}
return NULL;
}
>
> Try stracing the run.
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 2685 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-26 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-26 9:38 Can we force a KVM VCPU in Guest Mode to Exit to User Mode From User Mode ? Mian M. Hamayun
2012-07-26 10:06 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-26 10:34 ` Mian M. Hamayun
2012-07-26 10:43 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-26 13:39 ` Mian M. Hamayun [this message]
2012-07-26 13:55 ` Avi Kivity
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=50114898.5080402@imag.fr \
--to=mian-muhammad.hamayun@imag.fr \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).