From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: gleb@redhat.com, avi.kivity@gmail.com, mtosatti@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] KVM: MMU: document clear_spte_count
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:41:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51C1A6F0.6000603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51C1A34A.7080201@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Il 19/06/2013 14:25, Xiao Guangrong ha scritto:
> On 06/19/2013 07:55 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 19/06/2013 13:53, Xiao Guangrong ha scritto:
>>> On 06/19/2013 07:32 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>> Il 19/06/2013 11:09, Xiao Guangrong ha scritto:
>>>>> Document it to Documentation/virtual/kvm/mmu.txt
>>>>
>>>> While reviewing the docs, I looked at the code.
>>>>
>>>> Why can't this happen?
>>>>
>>>> CPU 1: __get_spte_lockless CPU 2: __update_clear_spte_slow
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> write low
>>>> read count
>>>> read low
>>>> read high
>>>> write high
>>>> check low and count
>>>> update count
>>>>
>>>> The check passes, but CPU 1 read a "torn" SPTE.
>>>
>>> In this case, CPU 1 will read the "new low bits" and the "old high bits", right?
>>> the P bit in the low bits is cleared when do __update_clear_spte_slow, i.e, it is
>>> not present, so the whole value is ignored.
>>
>> Indeed that's what the comment says, too. But then why do we need the
>> count at all? The spte that is read is exactly the same before and
>> after the count is updated.
>
> In order to detect repeatedly marking spte present to stop the lockless side
> to see present to present change, otherwise, we can get this:
>
> Say spte = 0xa11110001 (high 32bits = 0xa, low 32bit = 0x11110001)
>
> CPU 1: __get_spte_lockless CPU 2: __update_clear_spte_slow
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> read low: low= 0x11110001
> clear the spte, then spte = 0x0ull
> read high: high = 0x0
> set spte to 0xb11110001 (high 32bits = 0xb,
> low 32bit = 0x11110001)
>
> read low: 0x11110001 and see
> it is not changed.
>
> In this case, CPU 1 see the low bits are not changed, then it tries to access the memory at:
> 0x11110000.
Got it. What about this in the comment to __get_spte_lockless:
* The idea using the light way get the spte on x86_32 guest is from
* gup_get_pte(arch/x86/mm/gup.c).
*
* An spte tlb flush may be pending, because kvm_set_pte_rmapp
* coalesces them and we are running out of the MMU lock. Therefore
* we need to protect against in-progress updates of the spte.
*
* A race on changing present->non-present may get the old value for
* the high part of the spte. This is okay because the high part of
* the spte is ignored for non-present spte.
*
* However, we must detect a present->present change and reread the
* spte in case the change is in progress. Because all such changes
* are done in two steps (present->non-present and non-present->present),
* it is enough to count the number of present->non-present updates,
* which is done using clear_spte_count.
Paolo
> BTW, we are using tlb to protect lockless walking, the count can be drop after
> improving kvm_set_pte_rmapp where is the only place change spte from present to present
> without TLB flush.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-19 12:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-19 9:09 [PATCH 0/7] KVM: MMU: update mmu documentation Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 1/7] KVM: MMU: update the documentation for reverse mapping of parent_pte Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 10:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 2/7] KVM: MMU: document clear_spte_count Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 11:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 11:53 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 11:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 12:25 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-06-19 13:29 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 11:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 12:39 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 3/7] KVM: MMU: document write_flooding_count Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 11:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 12:43 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 4/7] KVM: MMU: document mmio page fault Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 12:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 12:59 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 5/7] KVM: MMU: document fast page fault in Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 12:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 13:00 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 6/7] KVM: MMU: document fast invalidate all pages Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 12:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 13:07 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 9:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] KVM: MMU: document fast invalidate all mmio sptes Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-19 12:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 13:10 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-06-20 5:21 ` Rob Landley
2013-06-20 8:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-06-19 17:41 ` [PATCH 0/7] KVM: MMU: update mmu documentation Paolo Bonzini
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=51C1A6F0.6000603@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=avi.kivity@gmail.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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