From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Alejandro Jimenez <alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joao.m.martins@oracle.com,
boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com,
mlevitsk@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Only set APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT if APICv is enabled
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:37:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZiBPHVKKnQPYK7Xy@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240417200849.971433-2-alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024, Alejandro Jimenez wrote:
> Use the APICv enablement status to determine if APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT
> needs to be set, instead of unconditionally setting the reason during
> initialization.
>
> Specifically, in cases where AVIC is disabled via module parameter or lack
> of hardware support, unconditionally setting an inhibit reason due to the
> absence of an in-kernel local APIC can lead to a scenario where the reason
> incorrectly remains set after a local APIC has been created by either
> KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP or the enabling of KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP_SPLIT. This is
> because the helpers in charge of removing the inhibit return early if
> enable_apicv is not true, and therefore the bit remains set.
>
> This leads to confusion as to the cause why APICv is not active, since an
> incorrect reason will be reported by tracepoints and/or a debugging tool
> that examines the currently set inhibit reasons.
>
> Fixes: ef8b4b720368 ("KVM: ensure APICv is considered inactive if there is no APIC")
> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Jimenez <alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 26288ca05364..eadd88fabadc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -9999,7 +9999,20 @@ static void kvm_apicv_init(struct kvm *kvm)
>
> init_rwsem(&kvm->arch.apicv_update_lock);
>
> - set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit(inhibits, APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT, true);
> + /*
> + * Unconditionally inhibiting APICv due to the absence of in-kernel
> + * local APIC can lead to a scenario where APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT
> + * remains set in the apicv_inhibit_reasons after a local APIC has been
> + * created by either KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP or the enabling of
> + * KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP_SPLIT.
> + * Hardware support and module parameters governing APICv enablement
> + * have already been evaluated and the initial status is available in
> + * enable_apicv, so it can be used here to determine if an inhibit needs
> + * to be set.
> + */
Eh, this is good changelog material, but I don't think it's not necessary for
a comment. Readers of this code really should be able to deduce that enable_apicv
can't be toggled on, i.e. DISABLE can't go away.
> + if (enable_apicv)
> + set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit(inhibits,
> + APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT, true);
>
> if (!enable_apicv)
> set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit(inhibits,
This can more concisely be:
enum kvm_apicv_inhibit reason = enable_apicv ? APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT :
APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_DISABLE;
set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit(&kvm->arch.apicv_inhibit_reasons, reason, true);
init_rwsem(&kvm->arch.apicv_update_lock);
which I think also helps the documentation side, e.g. it's shows the VM starts
with either ABSENT *or* DISABLE.
> --
> 2.39.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-17 22:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-17 20:08 [PATCH 0/2] APICv-related fixes for inhibits and tracepoint Alejandro Jimenez
2024-04-17 20:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Only set APICV_INHIBIT_REASON_ABSENT if APICv is enabled Alejandro Jimenez
2024-04-17 22:37 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-04-18 1:16 ` Alejandro Jimenez
2024-04-17 20:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: Remove VT-d mention in posted interrupt tracepoint Alejandro Jimenez
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=ZiBPHVKKnQPYK7Xy@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=alejandro.j.jimenez@oracle.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.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