linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeremi Piotrowski <jpiotrowski@linux.microsoft.com>,
	Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: Preserve TDP MMU roots until they are explicitly invalidated
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 18:54:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZEiEPVR7d+fwQ75y@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZEhN0D1zZyRDeyYz@google.com>

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, David Matlack wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 05:36:37PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023, David Matlack wrote:
> > > It'd be nice to keep around the lockdep assertion though for the other (and
> > > future) callers. The cleanest options I can think of are:
> > > 
> > > 1. Pass in a bool "vm_teardown" kvm_tdp_mmu_invalidate_all_roots() and
> > > use that to gate the lockdep assertion.
> > > 2. Take the mmu_lock for read in kvm_mmu_uninit_tdp_mmu() and pass
> > > down bool shared to kvm_tdp_mmu_invalidate_all_roots().
> > > 
> > > Both would satisfy your concern of not blocking teardown on the async
> > > worker and my concern of keeping the lockdep check. I think I prefer
> > > (1) since, as you point out, taking the mmu_lock at all is
> > > unnecessary.
> > 
> > Hmm, another option:
> > 
> >  3. Refactor the code so that kvm_arch_init_vm() doesn't call
> >     kvm_tdp_mmu_invalidate_all_roots() when VM creation fails, and then lockdep
> >     can ignore on users_count==0 without hitting the false positive.
> > 
> > I like (2) the least.  Not sure I prefer (1) versus (3).  I dislike passing bools
> > just to ignore lockdep, but reworking code for a "never hit in practice" edge case
> > is arguably worse :-/
> 
> Agree (2) is the worst option. (3) seems potentially brittle (likely to
> trigger a false-positive lockdep warning if the code ever gets
> refactored back).
> 
> How about throwing some underscores at the problem?

LOL, now we're speaking my language.

I think I have a better option though.  The false positives on users_count can be
suppressed by gating the assert on kvm->created_vcpus.  If KVM_CREATE_VM fails then
it's impossible for the VM to have created vCPUs.  I like this option in particular
because it captures why it's safe for the KVM_CREATE_VM error path to run without
mmu_lock (no vCPUs == no roots).

I'll manually test this against the error path tomorrow:

	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) &&
	    refcount_read(&kvm->users_count) && kvm->created_vcpus)
		lockdep_assert_held_write(&kvm->mmu_lock);

      reply	other threads:[~2023-04-26  1:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-21 21:49 [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: Preserve TDP MMU roots until they are explicitly invalidated Sean Christopherson
2023-04-21 21:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-21 23:12 ` David Matlack
2023-04-22  1:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-24 23:54     ` David Matlack
2023-04-25  0:36       ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-25 22:01         ` David Matlack
2023-04-26  1:54           ` Sean Christopherson [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=ZEiEPVR7d+fwQ75y@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=bgardon@google.com \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=jpiotrowski@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.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).