From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>,
Junaid Shahid <junaids@google.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@gmail.com>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Fix yielding in TDP MMU
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:28:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YAiEaB/t/o9JvRN4@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210112181041.356734-6-bgardon@google.com>
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, Ben Gardon wrote:
> There are two problems with the way the TDP MMU yields in long running
> functions. 1.) Given certain conditions, the function may not yield
> reliably / frequently enough. 2.) In some functions the TDP iter risks
> not making forward progress if two threads livelock yielding to
> one another.
>
> Case 1 is possible if for example, a paging structure was very large
> but had few, if any writable entries. wrprot_gfn_range could traverse many
> entries before finding a writable entry and yielding.
>
> Case 2 is possible if two threads were trying to execute wrprot_gfn_range.
> Each could write protect an entry and then yield. This would reset the
> tdp_iter's walk over the paging structure and the loop would end up
> repeating the same entry over and over, preventing either thread from
> making forward progress.
>
> Fix these issues by moving the yield to the beginning of the loop,
> before other checks and only yielding if the loop has made forward
> progress since the last yield.
I think it'd be best to split this into two patches, e.g. ensure forward
progress and then yield more agressively. They are two separate bugs, and I
don't think that ensuring forward progress would exacerbate case #1. I'm not
worried about breaking things so much as getting more helpful shortlogs; "Fix
yielding in TDP MMU" doesn't provide any insight into what exactly was broken.
E.g. something like:
KVM: x86/mmu: Ensure forward progress when yielding in TDP MMU iter
KVM: x86/mmu: Yield in TDU MMU iter even if no real work was done
> Fixes: a6a0b05da9f3 ("kvm: x86/mmu: Support dirty logging for the TDP MMU")
> Reviewed-by: Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> index b2784514ca2d..1987da0da66e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> @@ -470,9 +470,23 @@ static bool zap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *root,
> gfn_t start, gfn_t end, bool can_yield)
> {
> struct tdp_iter iter;
> + gfn_t last_goal_gfn = start;
> bool flush_needed = false;
>
> tdp_root_for_each_pte(iter, root, start, end) {
> + /* Ensure forward progress has been made before yielding. */
> + if (can_yield && iter.goal_gfn != last_goal_gfn &&
Make last_goal_gfn a property of the iterator, that way all this logic can be
shoved into tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(), and the comments about ensuring
forward progress and effectively invalidating/resetting the iterator (the
comment below) can be a function comment, as opposed to being copied everywhere.
E.g. there can be a big scary warning in the function comment stating that the
caller must restart its loop if the helper yielded.
Tangentially related, the name goal_gfn is quite confusing. "goal" and "end"
are synonyms, but "goal" is often initialized with "start", and it's not used to
terminate the walk. Maybe next_gfn instead? And maybe yielded_gfn, since
last_next_gfn is pretty horrendous.
> + tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm, &iter)) {
This isn't quite correct, as tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched() will do an
expensive remote TLB flush on every yield, even if no flush is needed. The
cleanest solution is likely to drop tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched() and
instead add a @flush param to tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(). If it's tagged
__always_inline, then the callers that unconditionally pass true/false will
optimize out the conditional code.
At that point, I think it would also make sense to fold tdp_iter_refresh_walk()
into tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(), because really we shouldn't be mucking with
the guts of the iter except for the yield case.
> + last_goal_gfn = iter.goal_gfn;
Another argument for both renaming goal_gfn and moving last_*_gfn into the iter:
it's not at all obvious that updating the last gfn _after_ tdp_iter_refresh_walk()
is indeed correct.
You can also avoid a local variable by doing max(iter->next_gfn, iter->gfn) when
calling tdp_iter_refresh_walk(). IMO, that's also a bit easier to understand
than an open-coded equivalent.
E.g. putting it all together, with yielded_gfn set by tdp_iter_start():
static __always_inline bool tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(struct kvm *kvm,
struct tdp_iter *iter,
bool flush)
{
/* Ensure forward progress has been made since the last yield. */
if (iter->next_gfn == iter->yielded_gfn)
return false;
if (need_resched() || spin_needbreak(&kvm->mmu_lock)) {
if (flush)
kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
cond_resched_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
/*
* Restart the walk over the paging structure from the root,
* starting from the highest gfn the iterator had previously
* reached. The entire paging structure, except the root, may
* have been completely torn down and rebuilt while we yielded.
*/
tdp_iter_start(iter, iter->pt_path[iter->root_level - 1],
iter->root_level, iter->min_level,
max(iter->next_gfn, iter->gfn));
return true;
}
return false;
}
> + flush_needed = false;
> + /*
> + * Yielding caused the paging structure walk to be
> + * reset so skip to the next iteration to continue the
> + * walk from the root.
> + */
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> if (!is_shadow_present_pte(iter.old_spte))
> continue;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-20 19:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-12 18:10 [PATCH 00/24] Allow parallel page faults with TDP MMU Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 01/24] locking/rwlocks: Add contention detection for rwlocks Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 02/24] sched: Add needbreak " Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 03/24] sched: Add cond_resched_rwlock Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 04/24] kvm: x86/mmu: change TDP MMU yield function returns to match cond_resched Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 18:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-21 20:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 14:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 05/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Fix yielding in TDP MMU Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 19:28 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2021-01-22 1:06 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 06/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Skip no-op changes in TDP MMU functions Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 19:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-25 23:51 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 07/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Add comment on __tdp_mmu_set_spte Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 14:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 08/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Add lockdep when setting a TDP MMU SPTE Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 19:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 14:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 09/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Don't redundantly clear TDP MMU pt memory Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 20:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 14:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 10/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Factor out handle disconnected pt Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 20:30 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 14:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 11/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Put TDP MMU PT walks in RCU read-critical section Ben Gardon
2021-01-20 22:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 12/24] kvm: x86/kvm: RCU dereference tdp mmu page table links Ben Gardon
2021-01-22 18:32 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 18:17 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 13/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Only free tdp_mmu pages after a grace period Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 14/24] kvm: mmu: Wrap mmu_lock lock / unlock in a function Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 15/24] kvm: mmu: Wrap mmu_lock cond_resched and needbreak Ben Gardon
2021-01-21 0:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-21 20:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 14:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 17:47 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 17:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 18:11 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 20:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-27 20:08 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-27 20:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-27 21:20 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-28 8:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 16/24] kvm: mmu: Wrap mmu_lock assertions Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 14:29 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 17/24] kvm: mmu: Move mmu_lock to struct kvm_arch Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 18/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Use an rwlock for the x86 TDP MMU Ben Gardon
2021-01-21 0:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 19/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Protect tdp_mmu_pages with a lock Ben Gardon
2021-01-21 19:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-21 21:32 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 14:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 21:47 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 22:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 22:09 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-27 12:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 13:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-26 21:07 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 20/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Add atomic option for setting SPTEs Ben Gardon
2021-01-26 14:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 21/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Use atomic ops to set SPTEs in TDP MMU map Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 22/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Flush TLBs after zap in TDP MMU PF handler Ben Gardon
2021-01-21 0:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 23/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Freeze SPTEs in disconnected pages Ben Gardon
2021-01-12 18:10 ` [PATCH 24/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Allow parallel page faults for the TDP MMU Ben Gardon
2021-01-21 0:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 21:57 ` Ben Gardon
2021-01-27 17:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-01-26 13:37 ` 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=YAiEaB/t/o9JvRN4@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=junaids@google.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=pfeiner@google.com \
--cc=pshier@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com \
--cc=yulei.kernel@gmail.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