From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: borntraeger@de.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com,
david@redhat.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, scgl@linux.ibm.com,
mimu@linux.ibm.com, nrb@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 14/19] KVM: s390: pv: cleanup leftover protected VMs if needed
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 11:59:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0a13397a-86e0-7c25-0044-7a5733f61730@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220603065645.10019-15-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
On 6/3/22 08:56, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> In upcoming patches it will be possible to start tearing down a
> protected VM, and finish the teardown concurrently in a different
> thread.
s/,/
s/the/its/
>
> Protected VMs that are pending for tear down ("leftover") need to be
> cleaned properly when the userspace process (e.g. qemu) terminates.
>
> This patch makes sure that all "leftover" protected VMs are always
> properly torn down.
So we're handling the kvm_arch_destroy_vm() case here, right?
Maybe add that in a more prominent way and rework the subject:
KVM: s390: pv: cleanup leftover PV VM shells on VM shutdown
>
> Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 2 +
> arch/s390/kvm/pv.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 3 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 5824efe5fc9d..cca8e05e0a71 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -924,6 +924,8 @@ struct kvm_s390_pv {
> u64 guest_len;
> unsigned long stor_base;
> void *stor_var;
> + void *prepared_for_async_deinit;
> + struct list_head need_cleanup;
> struct mmu_notifier mmu_notifier;
> };
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index fe1fa896def7..369de8377116 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -2890,6 +2890,8 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type)
> kvm_s390_vsie_init(kvm);
> if (use_gisa)
> kvm_s390_gisa_init(kvm);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.pv.need_cleanup);
> + kvm->arch.pv.prepared_for_async_deinit = NULL;
> KVM_EVENT(3, "vm 0x%pK created by pid %u", kvm, current->pid);
>
> return 0;
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> index 6cffea26c47f..8471c17d538c 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,19 @@
> #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h>
> #include "kvm-s390.h"
>
> +/**
> + * @struct leftover_pv_vm
Any other ideas on naming these VMs?
Also I'd turn that around: pv_vm_leftover
> + * Represents a "leftover" protected VM that is still registered with the
> + * Ultravisor, but which does not correspond any longer to an active KVM VM.
> + */
> +struct leftover_pv_vm {
> + struct list_head list;
> + unsigned long old_gmap_table;
> + u64 handle;
> + void *stor_var;
> + unsigned long stor_base;
> +};
> +
I think we should switch this patch and the next one and add this struct
to the next patch. The list work below makes more sense once the next
patch has been read.
> static void kvm_s390_clear_pv_state(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> kvm->arch.pv.handle = 0;
> @@ -158,23 +171,88 @@ static int kvm_s390_pv_alloc_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-15 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-03 6:56 [PATCH v11 00/19] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy for reboot Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 01/19] KVM: s390: pv: leak the topmost page table when destroy fails Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 02/19] KVM: s390: pv: handle secure storage violations for protected guests Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 03/19] KVM: s390: pv: handle secure storage exceptions for normal guests Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 04/19] KVM: s390: pv: refactor s390_reset_acc Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 05/19] KVM: s390: pv: usage counter instead of flag Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 06/19] KVM: s390: pv: add export before import Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 07/19] KVM: s390: pv: module parameter to fence asynchronous destroy Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-15 9:53 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-15 9:59 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 08/19] KVM: s390: pv: clear the state without memset Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 09/19] KVM: s390: pv: Add kvm_s390_cpus_from_pv to kvm-s390.h and add documentation Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 10/19] KVM: s390: pv: add mmu_notifier Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-08 12:02 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 11/19] s390/mm: KVM: pv: when tearing down, try to destroy protected pages Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-08 12:03 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 12/19] KVM: s390: pv: refactoring of kvm_s390_pv_deinit_vm Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 13/19] KVM: s390: pv: destroy the configuration before its memory Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-08 12:06 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-14 14:23 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 14/19] KVM: s390: pv: cleanup leftover protected VMs if needed Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-15 9:59 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2022-06-15 10:19 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-15 10:57 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-15 11:13 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 15/19] KVM: s390: pv: asynchronous destroy for reboot Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-15 10:58 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-20 9:41 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 16/19] KVM: s390: pv: api documentation for asynchronous destroy Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-20 9:13 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 17/19] KVM: s390: pv: add KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 18/19] KVM: s390: pv: avoid export before import if possible Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-07 14:33 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-20 9:56 ` Janosch Frank
2022-06-03 6:56 ` [PATCH v11 19/19] KVM: s390: pv: support for Destroy fast UVC Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-14 14:29 ` [PATCH v11 00/19] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy for reboot Janosch Frank
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=0a13397a-86e0-7c25-0044-7a5733f61730@linux.ibm.com \
--to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mimu@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=scgl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=thuth@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