public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 19/24] kvm: x86/mmu: Protect tdp_mmu_pages with a lock
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 11:22:44 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YAnUhCocizx97FWL@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210112181041.356734-20-bgardon@google.com>

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, Ben Gardon wrote:
> Add a lock to protect the data structures that track the page table
> memory used by the TDP MMU. In order to handle multiple TDP MMU
> operations in parallel, pages of PT memory must be added and removed
> without the exclusive protection of the MMU lock. A new lock to protect
> the list(s) of in-use pages will cause some serialization, but only on
> non-leaf page table entries, so the lock is not expected to be very
> contended.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 15 ++++++++
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c      | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 92d5340842c8..f8dccb27c722 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1034,6 +1034,21 @@ struct kvm_arch {
>  	 * tdp_mmu_page set and a root_count of 0.
>  	 */
>  	struct list_head tdp_mmu_pages;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Protects accesses to the following fields when the MMU lock is
> +	 * not held exclusively:
> +	 *  - tdp_mmu_pages (above)
> +	 *  - the link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used by the TDP MMU
> +	 *    when they are part of tdp_mmu_pages (but not when they are part
> +	 *    of the tdp_mmu_free_list or tdp_mmu_disconnected_list)

Neither tdp_mmu_free_list nor tdp_mmu_disconnected_list exists.

> +	 *  - lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages
> +	 *  - the lpage_disallowed_link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used
> +	 *    by the TDP MMU
> +	 *  May be acquired under the MMU lock in read mode or non-overlapping
> +	 *  with the MMU lock.
> +	 */
> +	spinlock_t tdp_mmu_pages_lock;
>  };
>  
>  struct kvm_vm_stat {
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> index 8b61bdb391a0..264594947c3b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_init_tdp_mmu(struct kvm *kvm)
>  	kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_enabled = true;
>  
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_roots);
> +	spin_lock_init(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages);
>  }
>  
> @@ -262,6 +263,58 @@ static void handle_changed_spte_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm, int as_id, gfn_t gfn,
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * tdp_mmu_link_page - Add a new page to the list of pages used by the TDP MMU
> + *
> + * @kvm: kvm instance
> + * @sp: the new page
> + * @atomic: This operation is not running under the exclusive use of the MMU
> + *	    lock and the operation must be atomic with respect to ther threads
> + *	    that might be adding or removing pages.
> + * @account_nx: This page replaces a NX large page and should be marked for
> + *		eventual reclaim.
> + */
> +static void tdp_mmu_link_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> +			      bool atomic, bool account_nx)
> +{
> +	if (atomic)

This is unnecessary, there is exactly one caller and it is always "atomic".

Assuming some of this code lives on (see below), I'd prefer a different name
than "atomic".  Writing the SPTE is atomic (though even that is a bit of a lie,
e.g. tdp_mmu_zap_spte_atomic() is very much not atomic), but all the other
operations are the exact opposite of atomic.

Maybe change it from a bool to an enum with READ/WRITE_LOCKED or something?

> +		spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> +	else
> +		kvm_mmu_lock_assert_held_exclusive(kvm);
> +
> +	list_add(&sp->link, &kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages);
> +	if (account_nx)
> +		account_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> +
> +	if (atomic)
> +		spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * tdp_mmu_unlink_page - Remove page from the list of pages used by the TDP MMU
> + *
> + * @kvm: kvm instance
> + * @sp: the page to be removed
> + * @atomic: This operation is not running under the exclusive use of the MMU
> + *	    lock and the operation must be atomic with respect to ther threads
> + *	    that might be adding or removing pages.
> + */
> +static void tdp_mmu_unlink_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> +				bool atomic)
> +{
> +	if (atomic)

Summarizing an off-list discussion with Ben:

This path isn't reachable in this series, which means all the RCU stuff is more
or less untestable.  Only the page fault path modifies the MMU while hold a read
lock, and it can't zap non-leaf shadow pages (only zaps large SPTEs and installs
new SPs).

The intent is to convert other zap-happy paths to a read lock, notably
kvm_mmu_zap_collapsible_sptes() and kvm_recover_nx_lpages().  Ben will include
patches to convert at least one of those in the next version of this series so
that there is justification and coverage for the RCU-deferred freeing.

> +		spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> +	else
> +		kvm_mmu_lock_assert_held_exclusive(kvm);
> +	list_del(&sp->link);
> +	if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> +		unaccount_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> +
> +	if (atomic)
> +		spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * handle_disconnected_tdp_mmu_page - handle a pt removed from the TDP structure
>   *

  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-21 19:23 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
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 [this message]
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=YAnUhCocizx97FWL@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