From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 292D2C54E5D for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:44:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=TrtAjB+Kj386fHahnAxunEV2VtAlbajevUuhu26CvhE=; b=eftUKE0fx4LspR lTAMeBltHpswEEzKwGEuCg66ATF5YY5ezDe9CjIX/Hk6sNS03CLwgo2AULiMLUDUON6CK60S1PkTa b0LLRMJImsnkyhxxTluHuePUziYrWFsfZjXQoDi7y+UvFqAzJzC2bfxtE5ksgcV5QknZoqzoF0U5z q1kV7ybyNBrxnarTHReEMm/mkVw/BctwLZSEjngqsS745Lnfe0B1xhA7dche50msnH35aly354Ey9 psCKgSpDd9NPJZo4zEyoysg3AVUiJpqx+Kn0KTTn7pu6tAGF/0XOKfNl8EO/3L8/02ZlLrST2sQRk CULY6MKGBe9QDwesvt3w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rmTCM-0000000BYaw-2ctQ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:43:46 +0000 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rmTCJ-0000000BYYu-0KfU for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:43:44 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710830622; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ohZmKZ+KwPhgcffK5N1nXKGEgL+2hzErlGYMYgMXGEk=; b=GjqkkDphCAUh8xy9PoOoSnanxjNSKNX5u9FQ2B0lHrM7wTBjYdeg7oDOQT1TCebRj4ZFkB tmFdPpq0cUJ1x3JjHZYUrrGS6vWqA+TIlMTxpvOx/Pz5o4h0u/Yynf5CrqvM75J1Kdx44/ /7N6LYTQrY8qMIqhTCOYwehWFurnqy4= Received: from mail-ed1-f70.google.com (mail-ed1-f70.google.com [209.85.208.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-257-BgE_85tUOMGM7YFBRXWooA-1; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 02:43:38 -0400 X-MC-Unique: BgE_85tUOMGM7YFBRXWooA-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-56b8c7b4fe0so731152a12.0 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:43:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710830617; x=1711435417; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ohZmKZ+KwPhgcffK5N1nXKGEgL+2hzErlGYMYgMXGEk=; b=JyoTowkMiyLuV/wptwaROjs58jadY6f8kfznfwAdquYv/Q8oFFAwR4H8NiHcBPDbB7 xpqRPd4Tt/AFegMG0hBUYWPtwhLvYEOT5u0HjbuMLVNBrKRELKqwpUGQSs8TWKqm4yz5 wp/juTfuBIGcXdQhLNQ9SVmOcJibNivk3GsXDURNu5PyRb5aSrw0dJgTtwzjZyDMcjvk 6BKwl4Sklx1SKxVW/7xeyyDvPNNdJPkjelWLBnLHvw0/PhNKXZkBY9v/kuWT4tOGZWcO 9UvkLfStxmFIl0TAx07M5XMH4UeNtWeEKyzoeA4WY95WTtQaLfCLKKA5Mpj5+s8vrSoF XwXg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXNg2nE8rl35bJD63wxznj8xZvYZJpa5KLekOxsy17uqv21kkzNkZlN1tSpK9KPv3j9kpAVvuJ97p528fp6JVvYwUdt0WRX3Kd/+iO5YrykeNj3aBs= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwI1YvrfiVVtPiqRSO9o2aMrSIJ3MhLBrwACkz0/WV/mjCm4sLL BAQP6GP8gTSS6AhsxIaUsbfoGuPkcvG0YikbJWVLByYK2cwA08teimOEKIEH7TpVlJ1HFCAXtcQ 1bbsUeIgARfYpF5b1t06t0iPMB81vk2WKWMF+NMGwBskXNfYsX51ggLDda5cHvV+hOMaRWWXu X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e59:b0:a46:d718:cd28 with SMTP id q25-20020a1709060e5900b00a46d718cd28mr883341eji.1.1710830617367; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:43:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEY6fpppJjYVQwexsFjrflpwT3duw/rnvrhjmHgbJldVOFDzm08arBFsoQf3CjLD5TtwZ8LBQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e59:b0:a46:d718:cd28 with SMTP id q25-20020a1709060e5900b00a46d718cd28mr883325eji.1.1710830616856; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2a02:14f:175:ca2b:adb0:2501:10a9:c4b2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jx25-20020a170907761900b00a4503a78dd5sm5780529ejc.17.2024.03.18.23.43.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 02:43:31 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Gavin Shan Cc: Will Deacon , virtualization@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jasowang@redhat.com, xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com, yihyu@redhat.com, shan.gavin@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Catalin Marinas , mochs@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio_ring: Fix the stale index in available ring Message-ID: <20240319024025-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20240314074923.426688-1-gshan@redhat.com> <20240318165924.GA1824@willie-the-truck> <35a6bcef-27cf-4626-a41d-9ec0a338fe28@redhat.com> <20240319020905-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <9b3030d1-cb2c-4ce0-8b24-1074b616fc84@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9b3030d1-cb2c-4ce0-8b24-1074b616fc84@redhat.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240318_234343_271130_372BE156 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 37.14 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 04:38:49PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote: > On 3/19/24 16:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > > > > > index 49299b1f9ec7..7d852811c912 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c > > > > > @@ -687,9 +687,15 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_split(struct virtqueue *_vq, > > > > > avail = vq->split.avail_idx_shadow & (vq->split.vring.num - 1); > > > > > vq->split.vring.avail->ring[avail] = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, head); > > > > > - /* Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose the > > > > > - * new available array entries. */ > > > > > - virtio_wmb(vq->weak_barriers); > > > > > + /* > > > > > + * Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose > > > > > + * the new available array entries. virtio_wmb() should be enough > > > > > + * to ensuere the order theoretically. However, a stronger barrier > > > > > + * is needed by ARM64. Otherwise, the stale data can be observed > > > > > + * by the host (vhost). A stronger barrier should work for other > > > > > + * architectures, but performance loss is expected. > > > > > + */ > > > > > + virtio_mb(false); > > > > > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow++; > > > > > vq->split.vring.avail->idx = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, > > > > > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow); > > > > > > > > Replacing a DMB with a DSB is _very_ unlikely to be the correct solution > > > > here, especially when ordering accesses to coherent memory. > > > > > > > > In practice, either the larger timing different from the DSB or the fact > > > > that you're going from a Store->Store barrier to a full barrier is what > > > > makes things "work" for you. Have you tried, for example, a DMB SY > > > > (e.g. via __smb_mb()). > > > > > > > > We definitely shouldn't take changes like this without a proper > > > > explanation of what is going on. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your comments, Will. > > > > > > Yes, DMB should work for us. However, it seems this instruction has issues on > > > NVidia's grace-hopper. It's hard for me to understand how DMB and DSB works > > > from hardware level. I agree it's not the solution to replace DMB with DSB > > > before we fully understand the root cause. > > > > > > I tried the possible replacement like below. __smp_mb() can avoid the issue like > > > __mb() does. __ndelay(10) can avoid the issue, but __ndelay(9) doesn't. > > > > > > static inline int virtqueue_add_split(struct virtqueue *_vq, ...) > > > { > > > : > > > /* Put entry in available array (but don't update avail->idx until they > > > * do sync). */ > > > avail = vq->split.avail_idx_shadow & (vq->split.vring.num - 1); > > > vq->split.vring.avail->ring[avail] = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, head); > > > > > > /* Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose the > > > * new available array entries. */ > > > // Broken: virtio_wmb(vq->weak_barriers); > > > // Broken: __dma_mb(); > > > // Work: __mb(); > > > // Work: __smp_mb(); > > > // Work: __ndelay(100); > > > // Work: __ndelay(10); > > > // Broken: __ndelay(9); > > > > > > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow++; > > > vq->split.vring.avail->idx = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, > > > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow); > > > > What if you stick __ndelay here? > > > > /* Put entry in available array (but don't update avail->idx until they > * do sync). */ > avail = vq->split.avail_idx_shadow & (vq->split.vring.num - 1); > vq->split.vring.avail->ring[avail] = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, head); > > /* Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose the > * new available array entries. */ > virtio_wmb(vq->weak_barriers); > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow++; > vq->split.vring.avail->idx = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, > vq->split.avail_idx_shadow); > /* Try __ndelay(x) here as Michael suggested > * > * Work: __ndelay(200); possiblly make it hard to reproduce > * Broken: __ndelay(100); > * Broken: __ndelay(20); > * Broken: __ndelay(10); > */ > __ndelay(200); So we see that just changing the timing masks the race. What are you using on the host side? vhost or qemu? > > > > > > vq->num_added++; > > > > > > pr_debug("Added buffer head %i to %p\n", head, vq); > > > END_USE(vq); > > > : > > > } > > > > > > I also tried to measure the consumed time for various barrier-relative instructions using > > > ktime_get_ns() which should have consumed most of the time. __smb_mb() is slower than > > > __smp_wmb() but faster than __mb() > > > > > > Instruction Range of used time in ns > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > __smp_wmb() [32 1128032] > > > __smp_mb() [32 1160096] > > > __mb() [32 1162496] > > > > > Thanks, > Gavin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel