From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <paulus@ozlabs.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 22:18:41 +1100
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: Liu ping fan <kernelfans@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/kvm: fix rare but potential deadlock scene
Message-ID: <20131106111841.GA22605@iris.ozlabs.ibm.com>
References: <1383637364-14691-1-git-send-email-pingfank@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <1383637364-14691-2-git-send-email-pingfank@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20131106050418.GD14842@drongo>
 <CAFgQCTsxEAqMDt=zfFMhEG2CZ6G=QpH+OsPvJkvjFU7GkDOcXQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <CAFgQCTsxEAqMDt=zfFMhEG2CZ6G=QpH+OsPvJkvjFU7GkDOcXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
 kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 02:02:07PM +0800, Liu ping fan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:42:43PM +0800, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> >> Since kvmppc_hv_find_lock_hpte() is called from both virtmode and
> >> realmode, so it can trigger the deadlock.
> >
> > Good catch, we should have preemption disabled while ever we have a
> > HPTE locked.
> >
> >> @@ -474,8 +474,10 @@ static int kvmppc_mmu_book3s_64_hv_xlate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t eaddr,
> >>       }
> >>
> >>       /* Find the HPTE in the hash table */
> >> +     preempt_disable();
> >>       index = kvmppc_hv_find_lock_hpte(kvm, eaddr, slb_v,
> >>                                        HPTE_V_VALID | HPTE_V_ABSENT);
> >> +     preempt_enable();
> >
> > Which means we need to add the preempt_enable after unlocking the
> > HPTE, not here.
> >
> Yes. Sorry, but I am not sure about whether we can call
> preempt_disable/enable() in realmode. I think since thread_info is
> allocated with linear address, so we can use preempt_disable/enable()
> inside kvmppc_hv_find_lock_hpte(), right?

Your analysis correctly pointed out that we can get a deadlock if we
can be preempted while holding a lock on a HPTE.  That means that we
have to disable preemption before taking an HPTE lock and keep it
disabled until after we unlock the HPTE.  Since the point of
kvmppc_hv_find_lock_hpte() is to lock the HPTE and return with it
locked, we can't have the preempt_enable() inside it.  The
preempt_enable() has to come after we have unlocked the HPTE.  That is
also why we can't have the preempt_enable() where your patch put it;
it needs to be about 9 lines further down, after the statement
hptep[0] = v.  (We also need to make sure to re-enable preemption in
the index < 0 case.)

Regards,
Paul.