From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755857Ab1LGMeu (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:34:50 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22117 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755789Ab1LGMes (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2011 07:34:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:33:30 -0200 From: Marcelo Tosatti To: Raghavendra K T Cc: Raghavendra K T , Greg Kroah-Hartman , KVM , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Sedat Dilek , Virtualization , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Dave Jiang , Thomas Gleixner , Stefano Stabellini , Gleb Natapov , Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar , Avi Kivity , Rik van Riel , Xen , LKML , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Peter Zijlstra , Sasha Levin , Suzuki Poulose , Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V3 2/4] kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks Message-ID: <20111207123330.GA32212@amt.cnet> References: <20111130085921.23386.89708.sendpatchset@oc5400248562.ibm.com> <20111130085959.23386.69166.sendpatchset@oc5400248562.ibm.com> <20111207104849.GA24849@amt.cnet> <4EDF5413.1030107@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EDF5413.1030107@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 05:24:59PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote: > On 12/07/2011 04:18 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 02:29:59PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote: > >> > >>+/* > >>+ * kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op: Kick a vcpu. > >>+ * > >>+ * @cpu - vcpu to be kicked. > >>+ */ > >>+static void kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op(struct kvm *kvm, int cpu) > >>+{ > >>+ struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = kvm_get_vcpu(kvm, cpu); > >>+ struct kvm_mp_state mp_state; > >>+ > >>+ mp_state.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE; > > > >Since vcpu->mp_state is not protected by a lock, this is potentially racy. For example: > > > >CPU0 CPU1 > >kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op running vcpuN > >vcpuN->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE; > > kvm_emulate_halt > > vcpuN->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_HALTED > > > >Is it harmless to lose a kick? > > > > Yes you are right. It was potentially racy and it was harmful too!. > I had observed that it was stalling the CPU before I introduced > kicked flag. > > But now, > > vcpu->kicked = 1 ==> kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_UNHALT, vcpu); ==> Ok, please use a more descriptive name, such as "pvlock_kicked" or something. > > __vcpu_run() ==> kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_UNHALT, vcpu) ==> > > vcpuN->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE; so eventually we will end up > in RUNNABLE. > > Also Avi pointed that, logically kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_mpstate should > be called only in vcpu thread, so after further debugging, I noticed > that, setting vcpuN->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE; is not > necessary. > I 'll remove that in the next patch. Thanks for pointing. In fact you don't need kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_mpstate either, only the new "kicked" flag. > > >