From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Andrew Donnellan <ajd@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: s390: Fix latent guest entry/exit bugs
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 12:05:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aHeHilsi8-Tr9_1D@J2N7QTR9R3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250708092742.104309-1-ajd@linux.ibm.com>
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 07:27:40PM +1000, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> In [0], the guest_{enter,exit}_irqoff() helpers were deprecated, in favour
> of guest_timing_{enter,exit}_irqoff() and
> guest_context_{enter,exit}_irqoff(). This was to fix a number of latent
> guest entry/exit bugs, relating to the enabling of interrupts during an
> RCU extended quiescent state, instrumentation code, and correct handling
> of lockdep and tracing.
>
> However, while arm64, mips, riscv and x86 have been migrated to the new
> helpers, s390 hasn't been. There was an initial attempt at [1] to do this,
> but that didn't work for reasons discussed at [2].
>
> Since then, Claudio Imbrenda has reworked much of the interrupt handling.
> Moving interrupt handling into vcpu_post_run() avoids the issues in [2],
> so we can now move to the new helpers.
Nice!
> I've rebased Mark's patches from [1]. kvm-unit-tests, the kvm selftests,
> and IBM's internal test suites pass under debug_defconfig.
I took a quick look at this and Claudio's preparatory work, and this all
looks like what I was hoping for back in one of the replies to [2]:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/YerRbhqvJ5nEcQYT@FVFF77S0Q05N/
I am not aware of any additional problems, and this all looks good to
me. Thanks for picking this up!
Mark.
> These patches do introduce some overhead - in my testing, a few of the
> tests in the kvm-unit-tests exittime test suite appear 6-11% slower, but
> some noticeable overhead may be unavoidable (we introduce a new function
> call and the irq entry/exit paths change a bit).
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220201132926.3301912-1-mark.rutland@arm.com/
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220119105854.3160683-7-mark.rutland@arm.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/a4a26805-3a56-d264-0a7e-60bed1ada9f3@linux.ibm.com/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241022120601.167009-1-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com/
>
> Mark Rutland (2):
> entry: Add arch_in_rcu_eqs()
> KVM: s390: Rework guest entry logic
>
> arch/s390/include/asm/entry-common.h | 10 ++++++
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 ++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c | 17 ++++------
> include/linux/entry-common.h | 16 +++++++++
> kernel/entry/common.c | 3 +-
> 6 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.50.0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-16 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-08 9:27 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: s390: Fix latent guest entry/exit bugs Andrew Donnellan
2025-07-08 9:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] entry: Add arch_in_rcu_eqs() Andrew Donnellan
2025-07-11 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-07-08 9:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: s390: Rework guest entry logic Andrew Donnellan
2025-07-09 9:22 ` [PATCH 0/2] KVM: s390: Fix latent guest entry/exit bugs Janosch Frank
2025-07-16 11:05 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
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=aHeHilsi8-Tr9_1D@J2N7QTR9R3 \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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