From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Kosuke Tatsukawa <tatsu@ab.jp.nec.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: fix waitqueue_active without memory barrier in virt/kvm/async_pf.c
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:45:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56177EAC.2070601@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17EC94B0A072C34B8DCF0D30AD16044A028747C1@BPXM09GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
On 09/10/2015 02:35, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> async_pf_execute kvm_vcpu_block
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
> if (waitqueue_active(&vcpu->wq))
> /* The CPU might reorder the test for
> the waitqueue up here, before
> prior writes complete */
> prepare_to_wait(&vcpu->wq, &wait,
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> /*if (kvm_vcpu_check_block(vcpu) < 0) */
> /*if (kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu)) { */
> ...
> return (vcpu->arch.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE &&
> !vcpu->arch.apf.halted)
> || !list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done)
> ...
The new memory barrier isn't "paired" with any other, and in
fact I think that the same issue exists on the other side:
list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done) may be reordered up,
before the prepare_to_wait:
spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
(vcpu->arch.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE &&
!vcpu->arch.apf.halted)
|| !list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done)
...
prepare_to_wait(&vcpu->wq, &wait,
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
/*if (kvm_vcpu_check_block(vcpu) < 0) */
/*if (kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu)) { */
...
return 0;
list_add_tail(&apf->link,
&vcpu->async_pf.done);
spin_unlock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
waited = true;
schedule();
if (waitqueue_active(&vcpu->wq))
So you need another smp_mb() after prepare_to_wait(). I'm not sure
if it's needed also for your original tty report, but I think it is
for https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/8/989 ("mei: fix waitqueue_active
without memory barrier in mei drivers").
I wonder if it makes sense to introduce smp_mb__before_spin_lock()
and smp_mb__after_spin_unlock(). On x86 the former could be a
simple compiler barrier, and on s390 both of them could. But that
should be a separate patch.
Thanks,
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-09 8:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-09 0:35 [PATCH] kvm: fix waitqueue_active without memory barrier in virt/kvm/async_pf.c Kosuke Tatsukawa
2015-10-09 8:45 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2015-10-09 8:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-09 10:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-09 9:04 ` Kosuke Tatsukawa
2015-10-09 10:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-09 12:21 ` Kosuke Tatsukawa
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=56177EAC.2070601@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tatsu@ab.jp.nec.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).