Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] KVM: x86: dynamic kvm_apic_map

Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-01T14:03:09Z

On 01/07/2016 14:44, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2016-07-01 10:42+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
>> On 01/07/2016 00:15, Andrew Honig wrote:
>>>>> + /* kvm_apic_map_get_logical_dest() expects multiples of 16 */
>>>>> + size = round_up(max_id + 1, 16);
>>> Now that you're using the full range of apic_id values, could this
>>> calculation overflow? Perhaps max_id could be u64?
>>
>> Good point, but I wonder if it's a good idea to let userspace allocate
>> 32 GB of memory. :)
>
> Yes, both could happen. I'll change it to u64 to make it future proof.

It's not necessary to change it to u64 if you put a limit, but you can
add a WARN_ON(size == 0).

Also if kvm_apic_map_get_logical_dest() expects multiples of 16, it
should warn whenever the invariant is not respected.

>> Let's put a limit on the maximum supported APIC ID, and report it
>> through KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION on the new KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API capability.
>> If 767 is enough for Knights Landing, the allocation below fits in two
>> pages. If you need to make it higher, please change the allocation to
>> use kvm_kvzalloc and kvfree.
>
> We sort of have a capability for maximum APIC ID, KVM_MAX_VCPU_ID,
> because VCPU ID is initial APIC ID and x2APIC ID should always be the
> initial APIC ID.

Should it? According to QEMU if you have e.g. 3 cores per socket one
socket take 4 APIC IDs. For Knights Landing the "worst" prime factor in
288 is 3^2 so you need APIC IDs up to 288 * (4/3)^2 = 512.

Paolo