From: boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: seanjc@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM/x86: Do not clear SIPI while in SMM
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:57:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66cc2113-3417-42d0-bf47-d707816cbb53@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c7091688-8af5-4e70-b2d7-6d0a7134dbbe@redhat.com>
On 4/16/24 4:53 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 4/16/24 22:47, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> When a processor is running in SMM and receives INIT message the
>> interrupt
>> is left pending until SMM is exited. On the other hand, SIPI, which
>> typically follows INIT, is discarded. This presents a problem since
>> sender
>> has no way of knowing that its SIPI has been dropped, which results in
>> processor failing to come up.
>>
>> Keeping the SIPI pending avoids this scenario.
>
> This is incorrect - it's yet another ugly legacy facet of x86, but we
> have to live with it. SIPI is discarded because the code is supposed
> to retry it if needed ("INIT-SIPI-SIPI").
I couldn't find in the SDM/APM a definitive statement about whether SIPI
is supposed to be dropped.
>
> The sender should set a flag as early as possible in the SIPI code so
> that it's clear that it was not received; and an extra SIPI is not a
> problem, it will be ignored anyway and will not cause trouble if
> there's a race.
>
> What is the reproducer for this?
>
Hotplugging/unplugging cpus in a loop, especially if you oversubscribe
the guest, will get you there in 10-15 minutes.
Typically (although I think not always) this is happening when OVMF if
trying to rendezvous and a processor is missing and is sent an extra SMI.
-boris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-16 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-16 20:47 [PATCH] KVM/x86: Do not clear SIPI while in SMM Boris Ostrovsky
2024-04-16 20:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-16 20:57 ` boris.ostrovsky [this message]
2024-04-16 22:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-16 22:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-16 23:02 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-04-16 22:56 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-04-16 23:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-16 23:37 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-04-17 12:40 ` Igor Mammedov
2024-04-17 13:58 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-04-19 16:17 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-09-24 9:40 ` Igor Mammedov
2024-09-24 21:59 ` boris.ostrovsky
2024-09-27 1:22 ` Eric Mackay
2024-09-27 9:28 ` Igor Mammedov
2024-09-30 23:34 ` Eric Mackay
2024-10-01 8:18 ` Igor Mammedov
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=66cc2113-3417-42d0-bf47-d707816cbb53@oracle.com \
--to=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.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