From: Mario Smarduch <m.smarduch@samsung.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
"kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: KVM: work around incoherency with uncached guest mappings
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:08:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54FA174D.4030807@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54F895C8.2070306@redhat.com>
On 03/05/2015 09:43 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 05/03/2015 15:58, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> It would especially suck if the user has a cluster with different
>>> machines, some of them coherent and others non-coherent, and then has to
>>> debug why the same configuration works on some machines and not on others.
>>
>> That's a problem indeed, especially with guest migration. But I don't
>> think we have any sane solution here for the bus master DMA.
>
> I do not oppose doing cache management in QEMU for bus master DMA
> (though if the solution you outlined below works it would be great).
>
>> ARM can override them as well but only making them stricter. Otherwise,
>> on a weakly ordered architecture, it's not always safe (let's say the
>> guest thinks it accesses Strongly Ordered memory and avoids barriers for
>> flag updates but the host "upgrades" it to Cacheable which breaks the
>> memory order).
>
> The same can happen on x86 though, even if it's rarer. You still need a
> barrier between stores and loads.
>
>> If we want the host to enforce guest memory mapping attributes via stage
>> 2, we could do it the other way around: get the guests to always assume
>> full cache coherency, generating Normal Cacheable mappings, but use the
>> stage 2 attributes restriction in the host to make such mappings
>> non-cacheable when needed (it works this way on ARM but not in the other
>> direction to relax the attributes).
>
> That sounds like a plan for device assignment. But it still would not
> solve the problem of the MMIO framebuffer, right?
>
>>> The problem arises with MMIO areas that the guest can reasonably expect
>>> to be uncacheable, but that are optimized by the host so that they end
>>> up backed by cacheable RAM. It's perfectly reasonable that the same
>>> device needs cacheable mapping with one userspace, and works with
>>> uncacheable mapping with another userspace that doesn't optimize the
>>> MMIO area to RAM.
>>
>> Unless the guest allocates the framebuffer itself (e.g.
>> dma_alloc_coherent), we can't control the cacheability via
>> "dma-coherent" properties as it refers to bus master DMA.
>
> Okay, it's good to rule that out. One less thing to think about. :)
> Same for _DSD.
>
>> So for MMIO with the buffer allocated by the host (Qemu), the only
>> solution I see on ARM is for the host to ensure coherency, either via
>> explicit cache maintenance (new KVM API) or by changing the memory
>> attributes used by Qemu to access such virtual MMIO.
>>
>> Basically Qemu is acting as a bus master when reading the framebuffer it
>> allocated but the guest considers it a slave access and we don't have a
>> way to tell the guest that such accesses should be cacheable, nor can we
>> upgrade them via architecture features.
>
> Yes, that's a way to put it.
>
>>> In practice, the VGA framebuffer has an optimization that uses dirty
>>> page tracking, so we could piggyback on the ioctls that return which
>>> pages are dirty. It turns out that piggybacking on those ioctls also
>>> should fix the case of migrating a guest while the MMU is disabled.
>>
>> Yes, Qemu would need to invalidate the cache before reading a dirty
>> framebuffer page.
>>
>> As I said above, an API that allows non-cacheable mappings for the VGA
>> framebuffer in Qemu would also solve the problem. I'm not sure what KVM
>> provides here (or whether we can add such API).
>
> Nothing for now; other architectures simply do not have the issue.
>
> As long as it's just VGA, we can quirk it. There's just a couple
> vendor/device IDs to catch, and the guest can then use a cacheable mapping.
>
> For a more generic solution, the API would be madvise(MADV_DONTCACHE).
> It would be easy for QEMU to use it, but I am not too optimistic about
> convincing the mm folks about it. We can try.
Interested to see the outcome.
I was thinking of a very basic memory driver that can provide
an uncached memslot to QEMU - in mmap() file operation
apply pgprot_uncached to allocated pages, lock them, flush TLB
call remap_pfn_range().
Mario
>
> Paolo
> _______________________________________________
> kvmarm mailing list
> kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-06 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-19 10:54 [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: KVM: work around incoherency with uncached guest mappings Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 10:54 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/3] arm64: KVM: handle some sysreg writes in EL2 Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-03 17:59 ` Mario Smarduch
2015-02-19 10:54 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: KVM: mangle MAIR register to prevent uncached guest mappings Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 10:54 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 3/3] arm64: KVM: keep trapping of VM sysreg writes enabled Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 13:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-02-19 13:44 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 15:19 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-02-19 15:22 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 14:50 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: KVM: work around incoherency with uncached guest mappings Alexander Graf
2015-02-19 14:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 15:27 ` Alexander Graf
2015-02-19 15:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 16:57 ` Andrew Jones
2015-02-19 17:19 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-19 17:55 ` Andrew Jones
2015-02-19 17:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-20 14:29 ` Andrew Jones
2015-02-20 14:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-20 15:36 ` Andrew Jones
2015-02-24 14:55 ` Andrew Jones
2015-02-24 17:47 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-02-24 19:12 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-02 16:31 ` Christoffer Dall
2015-03-02 16:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-03-02 16:55 ` Laszlo Ersek
2015-03-02 17:05 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-02 16:48 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-03 2:20 ` Mario Smarduch
2015-03-04 11:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-04 11:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-04 12:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-04 12:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-04 14:12 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-04 14:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-04 14:34 ` Peter Maydell
2015-03-04 17:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-03-04 17:28 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-05 10:12 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-03-05 11:04 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-05 11:52 ` Peter Maydell
2015-03-05 12:03 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-05 12:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-03-05 14:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-03-05 17:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-03-06 21:08 ` Mario Smarduch [this message]
2015-03-09 14:26 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-09 15:33 ` Mario Smarduch
2015-03-05 19:13 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-06 20:33 ` Mario Smarduch
2015-02-19 18:44 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-03 17:34 ` Alexander Graf
2015-03-03 18:13 ` Laszlo Ersek
2015-03-03 20:58 ` Andrew Jones
2015-03-03 18:32 ` Catalin Marinas
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=54FA174D.4030807@samsung.com \
--to=m.smarduch@samsung.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=lersek@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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