From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/3] pseries/kvm: Clear PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits before guest entry
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 12:29:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200408022957.GC44664@umbus.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200407132526.GB950@in.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5241 bytes --]
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 06:55:26PM +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> Hello David,
>
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 07:58:19PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 03:01:03PM +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 12:20:26PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > > Gautham R. Shenoy's on March 31, 2020 10:10 pm:
> > > > > From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > ISA v3.0 allows the guest to execute a stop instruction. For this, the
> > > > > PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits need to be cleared by the hypervisor before
> > > > > scheduling in the guest vCPU.
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently we always schedule in a vCPU with PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits
> > > > > set. This patch changes the behaviour to enter the guest with
> > > > > PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits cleared. This is a RFC patch where we
> > > > > unconditionally clear these bits. Ideally this should be done
> > > > > conditionally on platforms where the guest stop instruction has no
> > > > > Bugs (starting POWER9 DD2.3).
> > > >
> > > > How will guests know that they can use this facility safely after your
> > > > series? You need both DD2.3 and a patched KVM.
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, this is something that isn't addressed in this series (mentioned
> > > in the cover letter), which is a POC demonstrating that the stop0lite
> > > state in guest works.
> > >
> > > However, to answer your question, this is the scheme that I had in
> > > mind :
> > >
> > > OPAL:
> > > On Procs >= DD2.3 : we publish a dt-cpu-feature "idle-stop-guest"
> > >
> > > Hypervisor Kernel:
> > > 1. If "idle-stop-guest" dt-cpu-feature is discovered, then
> > > we set bool enable_guest_stop = true;
> > >
> > > 2. During KVM guest entry, clear PSSCR[ESL|EC] iff
> > > enable_guest_stop == true.
> > >
> > > 3. In kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(), for a new capability
> > > KVM_CAP_STOP, return true iff enable_guest_top == true.
> > >
> > > QEMU:
> > > Check with the hypervisor if KVM_CAP_STOP is present. If so,
> > > indicate the presence to the guest via device tree.
> >
> > Nack. Presenting different capabilities to the guest depending on
> > host capabilities (rather than explicit options) is never ok. It
> > means that depending on the system you start on you may or may not be
> > able to migrate to other systems that you're supposed to be able to,
>
> I agree that blocking migration for the unavailability of this feature
> is not desirable. Could you point me to some other capabilities in KVM
> which have been implemented via explicit options?
TBH, most of the options for the 'pseries' machine type are in this
category: cap-vsx, cap-dfp, cap-htm, a bunch related to various
Spectre mitigations, cap-hpt-max-page-size (maximum page size for hash
guests), cap-nested-hv, cap-large-decr, cap-fwnmi, resize-hpt (HPT
resizing extension), ic-mode (which irq controllers are available to
the guest).
> The ISA 3.0 allows the guest to execute the "stop" instruction.
So, this was a bug in DD2.2's implementation of the architecture?
> If the
> Hypervisor hasn't cleared the PSSCR[ESL|EC] then, guest executing the
> "stop" instruction in the causes a Hypervisor Facility Unavailable
> Exception, thus giving the hypervisor a chance to emulate the
> instruction. However, in the current code, when the hypervisor
> receives this exception, it sends a PROGKILL to the guest which
> results in crashing the guest.
>
> Patch 1 of this series emulates wakeup from the "stop"
> instruction. Would the following scheme be ok?
>
> OPAL:
> On Procs >= DD2.3 : we publish a dt-cpu-feature "idle-stop-guest"
>
> Hypervisor Kernel:
>
> If "idle-stop-guest" dt feature is available, then, before
> entering the guest, the hypervisor clears the PSSCR[EC|ESL]
> bits allowing the guest to safely execute stop instruction.
>
> If "idle-stop-guest" dt feature is not available, then, the
> Hypervisor sets the PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits, thereby causing a
> guest "stop" instruction execution to trap back into the
> hypervisor. We then emulate a wakeup from the stop
> instruction (Patch 1 of this series).
>
> Guest Kernel:
> If (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_300)) only then use the
> stop0lite cpuidle state.
>
> This allows us to migrate the KVM guest across any POWER9
> Hypervisor. The minimal addition that the Hypervisor would need is
> Patch 1 of this series.
That could be workable. Some caveats, though:
* How does the latency of the trap-and-emulate compare to the guest
using H_CEDE in the first place? i.e. how big a negative impact
will this have for guests running on DD2.2 hosts?
* We'll only be able to enable this in a new qemu machine type
version (say, pseries-5.1.0). Otherwise a guest could start
thinking it can use stop states, then be migrated to an older qemu
or host kernel without the support and crash.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-08 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-31 12:10 [RFC/PATCH 0/3] Add support for stop instruction inside KVM guest Gautham R. Shenoy
2020-03-31 12:10 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/3] powerpc/kvm: Handle H_FAC_UNAVAIL when guest executes stop Gautham R. Shenoy
2020-04-03 2:15 ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-03-31 12:10 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/3] pseries/kvm: Clear PSSCR[ESL|EC] bits before guest entry Gautham R. Shenoy
2020-04-03 2:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-04-03 9:31 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-04-06 9:58 ` David Gibson
2020-04-07 13:25 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-04-08 2:29 ` David Gibson [this message]
2020-04-13 10:25 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-04-14 2:17 ` David Gibson
2020-04-07 12:33 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-03-31 12:10 ` [RFC/PATCH 3/3] cpuidle/pseries: Add stop0lite state Gautham R. Shenoy
2020-03-31 12:14 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/3] Add support for stop instruction inside KVM guest Gautham R Shenoy
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=20200408022957.GC44664@umbus.fritz.box \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).