* [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me @ 2015-07-18 20:21 Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio Paolo Bonzini ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, rjones, stefanha The change from v2 is very small, notify_me is decremented as soon as ppoll returns. Paolo v1->v2 Split some changes to the tests to a separate patch Fix commit message [Laszlo] Clarify do...while loop in aio-win32.c [Kevin] v2->v3 Decrement notify_me a little earlier in aio-posix.c. Paolo Bonzini (3): tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio aio-win32: reorganize polling loop AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization aio-posix.c | 18 +++++------- aio-win32.c | 41 ++++++++++++++------------ async.c | 21 +++++--------- docs/aio_notify.promela | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- include/block/aio.h | 29 +++++++++++++++---- tests/test-aio.c | 26 +++-------------- 6 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-) -- 2.4.3 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] aio-win32: reorganize polling loop Paolo Bonzini ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, rjones, stefanha In these tests, the purpose of the initial calls to aio_poll and g_main_context_iteration is simply to put the AioContext in a known state; the return value of the function does not really matter. The next patch will change those return values; change the assertions to a while loop which expresses the intention better. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- tests/test-aio.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/test-aio.c b/tests/test-aio.c index a7cb5c9..e7bbb83 100644 --- a/tests/test-aio.c +++ b/tests/test-aio.c @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ static void test_wait_event_notifier(void) EventNotifierTestData data = { .n = 0, .active = 1 }; event_notifier_init(&data.e, false); aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &data.e, event_ready_cb); - g_assert(!aio_poll(ctx, false)); + while (aio_poll(ctx, false)); g_assert_cmpint(data.n, ==, 0); g_assert_cmpint(data.active, ==, 1); @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ static void test_flush_event_notifier(void) EventNotifierTestData data = { .n = 0, .active = 10, .auto_set = true }; event_notifier_init(&data.e, false); aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &data.e, event_ready_cb); - g_assert(!aio_poll(ctx, false)); + while (aio_poll(ctx, false)); g_assert_cmpint(data.n, ==, 0); g_assert_cmpint(data.active, ==, 10); @@ -669,7 +669,7 @@ static void test_source_wait_event_notifier(void) EventNotifierTestData data = { .n = 0, .active = 1 }; event_notifier_init(&data.e, false); aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &data.e, event_ready_cb); - g_assert(g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); + while (g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); g_assert_cmpint(data.n, ==, 0); g_assert_cmpint(data.active, ==, 1); @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ static void test_source_flush_event_notifier(void) EventNotifierTestData data = { .n = 0, .active = 10, .auto_set = true }; event_notifier_init(&data.e, false); aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &data.e, event_ready_cb); - g_assert(g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); + while (g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); g_assert_cmpint(data.n, ==, 0); g_assert_cmpint(data.active, ==, 10); -- 2.4.3 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] aio-win32: reorganize polling loop 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization Paolo Bonzini ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, rjones, stefanha Preparatory bugfixes and tweaks to the loop before the next patch: - disable dispatch optimization during aio_prepare. This fixes a bug. - do not modify "blocking" until after the first WaitForMultipleObjects call. This is needed in the next patch. - change the loop to do...while. This makes it obvious that the loop is always entered at least once. In the next patch this is important because the first iteration undoes the ctx->notify_me increment that happened before entering the loop. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- aio-win32.c | 21 ++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c index 233d8f5..9268b5c 100644 --- a/aio-win32.c +++ b/aio-win32.c @@ -284,11 +284,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) int timeout; aio_context_acquire(ctx); - have_select_revents = aio_prepare(ctx); - if (have_select_revents) { - blocking = false; - } - was_dispatching = ctx->dispatching; progress = false; @@ -304,6 +299,8 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) */ aio_set_dispatching(ctx, !blocking); + have_select_revents = aio_prepare(ctx); + ctx->walking_handlers++; /* fill fd sets */ @@ -317,12 +314,18 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) ctx->walking_handlers--; first = true; - /* wait until next event */ - while (count > 0) { + /* ctx->notifier is always registered. */ + assert(count > 0); + + /* Multiple iterations, all of them non-blocking except the first, + * may be necessary to process all pending events. After the first + * WaitForMultipleObjects call ctx->notify_me will be decremented. + */ + do { HANDLE event; int ret; - timeout = blocking + timeout = blocking && !have_select_revents ? qemu_timeout_ns_to_ms(aio_compute_timeout(ctx)) : 0; if (timeout) { aio_context_release(ctx); @@ -351,7 +354,7 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) blocking = false; progress |= aio_dispatch_handlers(ctx, event); - } + } while (count > 0); progress |= timerlistgroup_run_timers(&ctx->tlg); -- 2.4.3 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] aio-win32: reorganize polling loop Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-19 10:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-20 16:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi 4 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-18 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, rjones, stefanha This patch rewrites the ctx->dispatching optimization, which was the cause of some mysterious hangs that could be reproduced on aarch64 KVM only. The hangs were indirectly caused by aio_poll() and in particular by flash memory updates's call to blk_write(), which invokes aio_poll(). Fun stuff: they had an extremely short race window, so much that adding all kind of tracing to either the kernel or QEMU made it go away (a single printf made it half as reproducible). On the plus side, the failure mode (a hang until the next keypress) made it very easy to examine the state of the process with a debugger. And there was a very nice reproducer from Laszlo, which failed pretty often (more than half of the time) on any version of QEMU with a non-debug kernel; it also failed fast, while still in the firmware. So, it could have been worse. For some unknown reason they happened only with virtio-scsi, but that's not important. It's more interesting that they disappeared with io=native, making thread-pool.c a likely suspect for where the bug arose. thread-pool.c is also one of the few places which use bottom halves across threads, by the way. I hope that no other similar bugs exist, but just in case :) I am going to describe how the successful debugging went... Since the likely culprit was the ctx->dispatching optimization, which mostly affects bottom halves, the first observation was that there are two qemu_bh_schedule() invocations in the thread pool: the one in the aio worker and the one in thread_pool_completion_bh. The latter always causes the optimization to trigger, the former may or may not. In order to restrict the possibilities, I introduced new functions qemu_bh_schedule_slow() and qemu_bh_schedule_fast(): /* qemu_bh_schedule_slow: */ ctx = bh->ctx; bh->idle = 0; if (atomic_xchg(&bh->scheduled, 1) == 0) { event_notifier_set(&ctx->notifier); } /* qemu_bh_schedule_fast: */ ctx = bh->ctx; bh->idle = 0; assert(ctx->dispatching); atomic_xchg(&bh->scheduled, 1); Notice how the atomic_xchg is still in qemu_bh_schedule_slow(). This was already debated a few months ago, so I assumed it to be correct. In retrospect this was a very good idea, as you'll see later. Changing thread_pool_completion_bh() to qemu_bh_schedule_fast() didn't trigger the assertion (as expected). Changing the worker's invocation to qemu_bh_schedule_slow() didn't hide the bug (another assumption which luckily held). This already limited heavily the amount of interaction between the threads, hinting that the problematic events must have triggered around thread_pool_completion_bh(). As mentioned early, invoking a debugger to examine the state of a hung process was pretty easy; the iothread was always waiting on a poll(..., -1) system call. Infinite timeouts are much rarer on x86, and this could be the reason why the bug was never observed there. With the buggy sequence more or less resolved to an interaction between thread_pool_completion_bh() and poll(..., -1), my "tracing" strategy was to just add a few qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_REALTIME) calls, hoping that the ordering of aio_ctx_prepare(), aio_ctx_dispatch, poll() and qemu_bh_schedule_fast() would provide some hint. The output was: (gdb) p last_prepare $3 = 103885451 (gdb) p last_dispatch $4 = 103876492 (gdb) p last_poll $5 = 115909333 (gdb) p last_schedule $6 = 115925212 Notice how the last call to qemu_poll_ns() came after aio_ctx_dispatch(). This makes little sense unless there is an aio_poll() call involved, and indeed with a slightly different instrumentation you can see that there is one: (gdb) p last_prepare $3 = 107569679 (gdb) p last_dispatch $4 = 107561600 (gdb) p last_aio_poll $5 = 110671400 (gdb) p last_schedule $6 = 110698917 So the scenario becomes clearer: iothread VCPU thread -------------------------------------------------------------------------- aio_ctx_prepare aio_ctx_check qemu_poll_ns(timeout=-1) aio_poll aio_dispatch thread_pool_completion_bh qemu_bh_schedule() At this point bh->scheduled = 1 and the iothread has not been woken up. The solution must be close, but this alone should not be a problem, because the bottom half is only rescheduled to account for rare situations (see commit 3c80ca1, thread-pool: avoid deadlock in nested aio_poll() calls, 2014-07-15). Introducing a third thread---a thread pool worker thread, which also does qemu_bh_schedule()---does bring out the problematic case. The third thread must be awakened *after* the callback is complete and thread_pool_completion_bh has redone the whole loop, explaining the short race window. And then this is what happens: thread pool worker -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <I/O completes> qemu_bh_schedule() Tada, bh->scheduled is already 1, so qemu_bh_schedule() does nothing and the iothread is never woken up. This is where the bh->scheduled optimization comes into play---it is correct, but removing it would have masked the bug. So, what is the bug? Well, the question asked by the ctx->dispatching optimization ("is any active aio_poll dispatching?") was wrong. The right question to ask instead is "is any active aio_poll *not* dispatching", i.e. in the prepare or poll phases? In that case, the aio_poll is sleeping or might go to sleep anytime soon, and the EventNotifier must be invoked to wake it up. In any other case (including if there is *no* active aio_poll at all!) we can just wait for the next prepare phase to pick up the event (e.g. a bottom half); the prepare phase will avoid the blocking and service the bottom half. Expressing the invariant with a logic formula, the broken one looked like: !(exists(thread): in_dispatching(thread)) => !optimize or equivalently: !(exists(thread): in_aio_poll(thread) && in_dispatching(thread)) => !optimize In the correct one, the negation is in a slightly different place: (exists(thread): in_aio_poll(thread) && !in_dispatching(thread)) => !optimize or equivalently: (exists(thread): in_prepare_or_poll(thread)) => !optimize Even if the difference boils down to moving an exclamation mark :) the implementation is quite different. However, I think the new one is simpler to understand. In the old implementation, the "exists" was implemented with a boolean value. This didn't really support well the case of multiple concurrent event loops, but I thought that this was okay: aio_poll holds the AioContext lock so there cannot be concurrent aio_poll invocations, and I was just considering nested event loops. However, aio_poll _could_ indeed be concurrent with the GSource. This is why I came up with the wrong invariant. In the new implementation, "exists" is computed simply by counting how many threads are in the prepare or poll phases. There are some interesting points to consider, but the gist of the idea remains: 1) AioContext can be used through GSource as well; as mentioned in the patch, bit 0 of the counter is reserved for the GSource. 2) the counter need not be updated for a non-blocking aio_poll, because it won't sleep forever anyway. This is just a matter of checking the "blocking" variable. This requires some changes to the win32 implementation, but is otherwise not too complicated. 3) as mentioned above, the new implementation will not call aio_notify when there is *no* active aio_poll at all. The tests have to be adjusted for this change. The calls to aio_notify in async.c are fine; they only want to kick aio_poll out of a blocking wait, but need not do anything if aio_poll is not running. 4) nested aio_poll: these just work with the new implementation; when a nested event loop is invoked, the outer event loop is never in the prepare or poll phases. The outer event loop thus has already decremented the counter. Reported-by: Richard W. M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> Reported-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- aio-posix.c | 18 +++++------- aio-win32.c | 20 ++++++------- async.c | 21 +++++--------- docs/aio_notify.promela | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- include/block/aio.h | 29 +++++++++++++++---- tests/test-aio.c | 18 ------------ 6 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-) diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c index 4abec38..249889f 100644 --- a/aio-posix.c +++ b/aio-posix.c @@ -233,26 +233,23 @@ static void add_pollfd(AioHandler *node) bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) { AioHandler *node; - bool was_dispatching; int i, ret; bool progress; int64_t timeout; aio_context_acquire(ctx); - was_dispatching = ctx->dispatching; progress = false; /* aio_notify can avoid the expensive event_notifier_set if * everything (file descriptors, bottom halves, timers) will * be re-evaluated before the next blocking poll(). This is * already true when aio_poll is called with blocking == false; - * if blocking == true, it is only true after poll() returns. - * - * If we're in a nested event loop, ctx->dispatching might be true. - * In that case we can restore it just before returning, but we - * have to clear it now. + * if blocking == true, it is only true after poll() returns, + * so disable the optimization now. */ - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, !blocking); + if (blocking) { + atomic_add(&ctx->notify_me, 2); + } ctx->walking_handlers++; @@ -272,6 +269,9 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) aio_context_release(ctx); } ret = qemu_poll_ns((GPollFD *)pollfds, npfd, timeout); + if (blocking) { + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); + } if (timeout) { aio_context_acquire(ctx); } @@ -287,12 +287,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) ctx->walking_handlers--; /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, true); if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { progress = true; } - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, was_dispatching); aio_context_release(ctx); return progress; diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c index 9268b5c..ea655b0 100644 --- a/aio-win32.c +++ b/aio-win32.c @@ -279,25 +279,23 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) { AioHandler *node; HANDLE events[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1]; - bool was_dispatching, progress, have_select_revents, first; + bool progress, have_select_revents, first; int count; int timeout; aio_context_acquire(ctx); - was_dispatching = ctx->dispatching; progress = false; /* aio_notify can avoid the expensive event_notifier_set if * everything (file descriptors, bottom halves, timers) will * be re-evaluated before the next blocking poll(). This is * already true when aio_poll is called with blocking == false; - * if blocking == true, it is only true after poll() returns. - * - * If we're in a nested event loop, ctx->dispatching might be true. - * In that case we can restore it just before returning, but we - * have to clear it now. + * if blocking == true, it is only true after poll() returns, + * so disable the optimization now. */ - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, !blocking); + if (blocking) { + atomic_add(&ctx->notify_me, 2); + } have_select_revents = aio_prepare(ctx); @@ -331,10 +329,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) aio_context_release(ctx); } ret = WaitForMultipleObjects(count, events, FALSE, timeout); + if (blocking) { + assert(first); + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); + } if (timeout) { aio_context_acquire(ctx); } - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, true); if (first && aio_bh_poll(ctx)) { progress = true; @@ -358,7 +359,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) progress |= timerlistgroup_run_timers(&ctx->tlg); - aio_set_dispatching(ctx, was_dispatching); aio_context_release(ctx); return progress; } diff --git a/async.c b/async.c index 77d080d..a232192 100644 --- a/async.c +++ b/async.c @@ -184,6 +184,8 @@ aio_ctx_prepare(GSource *source, gint *timeout) { AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; + atomic_or(&ctx->notify_me, 1); + /* We assume there is no timeout already supplied */ *timeout = qemu_timeout_ns_to_ms(aio_compute_timeout(ctx)); @@ -200,6 +202,7 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; QEMUBH *bh; + atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { return true; @@ -254,23 +257,13 @@ ThreadPool *aio_get_thread_pool(AioContext *ctx) return ctx->thread_pool; } -void aio_set_dispatching(AioContext *ctx, bool dispatching) -{ - ctx->dispatching = dispatching; - if (!dispatching) { - /* Write ctx->dispatching before reading e.g. bh->scheduled. - * Optimization: this is only needed when we're entering the "unsafe" - * phase where other threads must call event_notifier_set. - */ - smp_mb(); - } -} - void aio_notify(AioContext *ctx) { - /* Write e.g. bh->scheduled before reading ctx->dispatching. */ + /* Write e.g. bh->scheduled before reading ctx->notify_me. Pairs + * with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or atomic_add in aio_poll. + */ smp_mb(); - if (!ctx->dispatching) { + if (ctx->notify_me) { event_notifier_set(&ctx->notifier); } } diff --git a/docs/aio_notify.promela b/docs/aio_notify.promela index ad3f6f0..fccc7ee 100644 --- a/docs/aio_notify.promela +++ b/docs/aio_notify.promela @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ /* - * This model describes the interaction between aio_set_dispatching() + * This model describes the interaction between ctx->notify_me * and aio_notify(). * * Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> @@ -14,57 +14,53 @@ * spin -a docs/aio_notify.promela * gcc -O2 pan.c * ./a.out -a + * + * To verify it (with a bug planted in the model): + * spin -a -DBUG docs/aio_notify.promela + * gcc -O2 pan.c + * ./a.out -a */ #define MAX 4 #define LAST (1 << (MAX - 1)) #define FINAL ((LAST << 1) - 1) -bool dispatching; +bool notify_me; bool event; -int req, done; +int req; +int done; active proctype waiter() { - int fetch, blocking; + int fetch; - do - :: done != FINAL -> { - // Computing "blocking" is separate from execution of the - // "bottom half" - blocking = (req == 0); - - // This is our "bottom half" - atomic { fetch = req; req = 0; } - done = done | fetch; - - // Wait for a nudge from the other side - do - :: event == 1 -> { event = 0; break; } - :: !blocking -> break; - od; + do + :: true -> { + notify_me++; - dispatching = 1; + if +#ifndef BUG + :: (req > 0) -> skip; +#endif + :: else -> + // Wait for a nudge from the other side + do + :: event == 1 -> { event = 0; break; } + od; + fi; - // If you are simulating this model, you may want to add - // something like this here: - // - // int foo; foo++; foo++; foo++; - // - // This only wastes some time and makes it more likely - // that the notifier process hits the "fast path". + notify_me--; - dispatching = 0; + atomic { fetch = req; req = 0; } + done = done | fetch; } - :: else -> break; od } active proctype notifier() { int next = 1; - int sets = 0; do :: next <= LAST -> { @@ -74,8 +70,8 @@ active proctype notifier() // aio_notify if - :: dispatching == 0 -> sets++; event = 1; - :: else -> skip; + :: notify_me == 1 -> event = 1; + :: else -> printf("Skipped event_notifier_set\n"); skip; fi; // Test both synchronous and asynchronous delivery @@ -86,19 +82,12 @@ active proctype notifier() :: 1 -> skip; fi; } - :: else -> break; od; - printf("Skipped %d event_notifier_set\n", MAX - sets); } -#define p (done == FINAL) - -never { - do - :: 1 // after an arbitrarily long prefix - :: p -> break // p becomes true - od; - do - :: !p -> accept: break // it then must remains true forever after - od +never { /* [] done < FINAL */ +accept_init: + do + :: done < FINAL -> skip; + od; } diff --git a/include/block/aio.h b/include/block/aio.h index b46103e..be91e3f 100644 --- a/include/block/aio.h +++ b/include/block/aio.h @@ -63,10 +63,30 @@ struct AioContext { */ int walking_handlers; - /* Used to avoid unnecessary event_notifier_set calls in aio_notify. - * Writes protected by lock or BQL, reads are lockless. + /* Used to avoid unnecessary event_notifier_set calls in aio_notify; + * accessed with atomic primitives. If this field is 0, everything + * (file descriptors, bottom halves, timers) will be re-evaluated + * before the next blocking poll(), thus the event_notifier_set call + * can be skipped. If it is non-zero, you may need to wake up a + * concurrent aio_poll or the glib main event loop, making + * event_notifier_set necessary. + * + * Bit 0 is reserved for GSource usage of the AioContext, and is 1 + * between a call to aio_ctx_check and the next call to aio_ctx_dispatch. + * Bits 1-31 simply count the number of active calls to aio_poll + * that are in the prepare or poll phase. + * + * The GSource and aio_poll must use a different mechanism because + * there is no certainty that a call to GSource's prepare callback + * (via g_main_context_prepare) is indeed followed by check and + * dispatch. It's not clear whether this would be a bug, but let's + * play safe and allow it---it will just cause extra calls to + * event_notifier_set until the next call to dispatch. + * + * Instead, the aio_poll calls include both the prepare and the + * dispatch phase, hence a simple counter is enough for them. */ - bool dispatching; + uint32_t notify_me; /* lock to protect between bh's adders and deleter */ QemuMutex bh_lock; @@ -89,9 +109,6 @@ struct AioContext { QEMUTimerListGroup tlg; }; -/* Used internally to synchronize aio_poll against qemu_bh_schedule. */ -void aio_set_dispatching(AioContext *ctx, bool dispatching); - /** * aio_context_new: Allocate a new AioContext. * diff --git a/tests/test-aio.c b/tests/test-aio.c index e7bbb83..217e337 100644 --- a/tests/test-aio.c +++ b/tests/test-aio.c @@ -97,14 +97,6 @@ static void event_ready_cb(EventNotifier *e) /* Tests using aio_*. */ -static void test_notify(void) -{ - g_assert(!aio_poll(ctx, false)); - aio_notify(ctx); - g_assert(!aio_poll(ctx, true)); - g_assert(!aio_poll(ctx, false)); -} - typedef struct { QemuMutex start_lock; bool thread_acquired; @@ -494,14 +486,6 @@ static void test_timer_schedule(void) * works well, and that's what I am using. */ -static void test_source_notify(void) -{ - while (g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); - aio_notify(ctx); - g_assert(g_main_context_iteration(NULL, true)); - g_assert(!g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); -} - static void test_source_flush(void) { g_assert(!g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); @@ -830,7 +814,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) while (g_main_context_iteration(NULL, false)); g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL); - g_test_add_func("/aio/notify", test_notify); g_test_add_func("/aio/acquire", test_acquire); g_test_add_func("/aio/bh/schedule", test_bh_schedule); g_test_add_func("/aio/bh/schedule10", test_bh_schedule10); @@ -845,7 +828,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) g_test_add_func("/aio/event/flush", test_flush_event_notifier); g_test_add_func("/aio/timer/schedule", test_timer_schedule); - g_test_add_func("/aio-gsource/notify", test_source_notify); g_test_add_func("/aio-gsource/flush", test_source_flush); g_test_add_func("/aio-gsource/bh/schedule", test_source_bh_schedule); g_test_add_func("/aio-gsource/bh/schedule10", test_source_bh_schedule10); -- 2.4.3 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-19 10:08 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-20 16:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi 4 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-19 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha I tested this patch series, plus 'AioContext: fix missing wakeups due to event_notifier_test_and_clear' overnight, and there were no failures after something like 2500 iterations. So: Tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2015-07-19 10:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-20 16:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi 4 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Stefan Hajnoczi @ 2015-07-20 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: kwolf, famz, lersek, qemu-devel, rjones [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1095 bytes --] On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 10:21:28PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The change from v2 is very small, notify_me is decremented as soon > as ppoll returns. > > Paolo > > v1->v2 > Split some changes to the tests to a separate patch > Fix commit message [Laszlo] > Clarify do...while loop in aio-win32.c [Kevin] > > v2->v3 > Decrement notify_me a little earlier in aio-posix.c. > > Paolo Bonzini (3): > tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio > aio-win32: reorganize polling loop > AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization > > aio-posix.c | 18 +++++------- > aio-win32.c | 41 ++++++++++++++------------ > async.c | 21 +++++--------- > docs/aio_notify.promela | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- > include/block/aio.h | 29 +++++++++++++++---- > tests/test-aio.c | 26 +++-------------- > 6 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-) Thanks, applied to my block tree: https://github.com/stefanha/qemu/commits/block Stefan [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me @ 2015-07-16 9:56 Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-16 11:07 ` Kevin Wolf ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-16 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, rjones, stefanha Apart from an additional assertion this is exactly the same code as v1, but split across three patches so that the important one focuses on the optimization. Paolo v1->v2 Split some changes to the tests to a separate patch Fix commit message [Laszlo] Clarify do...while loop in aio-win32.c [Kevin] Paolo Bonzini (3): tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio aio-win32: reorganize polling loop AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization aio-posix.c | 19 ++++++------ aio-win32.c | 41 ++++++++++++++------------ async.c | 21 +++++--------- docs/aio_notify.promela | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- include/block/aio.h | 29 +++++++++++++++---- tests/test-aio.c | 26 +++-------------- 6 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-) -- 2.4.3 diff from v1: diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c index ae7c6cf..9d6c12f 100644 --- a/aio-win32.c +++ b/aio-win32.c @@ -312,7 +312,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) ctx->walking_handlers--; first = true; - /* wait until next event */ + /* ctx->notifier is always registered. */ + assert(count > 0); + + /* Multiple iterations, all of them non-blocking except the first, + * may be necessary to process all pending events. After the first + * WaitForMultipleObjects call ctx->notify_me will be decremented. + */ do { HANDLE event; int ret; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 9:56 Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-16 11:07 ` Kevin Wolf 2015-07-16 12:44 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Kevin Wolf @ 2015-07-16 11:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha, rjones Am 16.07.2015 um 11:56 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: > Apart from an additional assertion this is exactly the same code as v1, > but split across three patches so that the important one focuses on the > optimization. > > Paolo > > v1->v2 > Split some changes to the tests to a separate patch > Fix commit message [Laszlo] > Clarify do...while loop in aio-win32.c [Kevin] > > Paolo Bonzini (3): > tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio > aio-win32: reorganize polling loop > AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 9:56 Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-16 11:07 ` Kevin Wolf @ 2015-07-16 12:44 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-16 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1249 bytes --] Sorry for the very long delay in replying to this. I wanted to be absolutely sure I was reproducing the bug. Unfortunately I'm only able to reproduce the bug with qemu 2.3.0 (both the version in Fedora Rawhide, or the tagged v2.3.0 from git). I cannot currently reproduce it at all with upstream qemu from git. The patches understandably only apply to upstream qemu from git, and have quite a few tricky conflicts with v2.3.0. I'll keep trying on this one. It may be that the window for the bug to reproduce with qemu.git has got smaller. Rich. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes on how I try to reproduce this: (1) Using Fedora Rawhide aarch64 (2) libguestfs checked out and compiled from git (3) kraxel's edk2.git-aarch64-0-20150713.b1115.g2ad9cf3.noarch (4) heisenscsi.pl (attached). $ export LIBGUESTFS_HV=/path/to/qemu/aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 $ while true; do echo .; ./run ./heisenscsi.pl ; done -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org [-- Attachment #2: heisenscsi.pl --] [-- Type: application/x-perl, Size: 561 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 9:56 Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-16 11:07 ` Kevin Wolf 2015-07-16 12:44 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 4:44 ` Paolo Bonzini 2 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-16 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. It's the exact same hang in both cases. Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-16 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 0:17 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 4:44 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-16 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is > now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens > more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs > with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. > > It's the exact same hang in both cases. > > Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? > > Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. I would guess instead that there are two separate bugs, but it's not impossible that it's still there. Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 0:17 ` Paolo Bonzini 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On 17/07/2015 00:06, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is >> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens >> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs >> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. >> >> It's the exact same hang in both cases. >> >> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? >> >> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. > > I would guess instead that there are two separate bugs, but it's not > impossible that it's still there. Reproduced after ~80 runs... Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 4:44 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 9:30 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 4:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones; +Cc: kwolf, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is > now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens > more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs > with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. > > It's the exact same hang in both cases. > > Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? > > Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. Would seem at first glance like a different bug. Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). Perhaps this: i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread --------------------------------------------------------------------- lock_iothread notify_me = 1 ... unlock_iothread lock_iothread notify_me = 3 ppoll notify_me = 1 bh->scheduled = 1 event_notifier_set event_notifier_test_and_clear ppoll ^^ hang In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a successful test really says anything useful. Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 4:44 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 9:30 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 12:58 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier 0 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones; +Cc: kwolf, Marc Zyngier, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On 17/07/2015 06:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is >> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens >> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs >> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. >> >> It's the exact same hang in both cases. >> >> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? >> >> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. > > Would seem at first glance like a different bug. > > Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug > more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding > other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). > > Perhaps this: > > i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > lock_iothread > notify_me = 1 > ... > unlock_iothread > lock_iothread > notify_me = 3 > ppoll > notify_me = 1 > bh->scheduled = 1 > event_notifier_set > event_notifier_test_and_clear > ppoll > ^^ hang > > In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but > perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. > > The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is > not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. > > Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before > aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close > > However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty > expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the > other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race > very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a > successful test really says anything useful. So it may not be useful, but still successful test is successful. :) The following patch, which also includes the delta between v2 and v3 of this series, survived 674 reboots before hitting a definitely unrelated problem: error: kvm run failed Function not implemented PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) For the record, this is the kvm_run struct: $6 = {request_interrupt_window = 0 '\000', padding1 = "\000\000\000\000\000\000", exit_reason = 0, ready_for_interrupt_injection = 0 '\000', if_flag = 0 '\000', flags = 0, cr8 = 0, apic_base = 0, {hw = { hardware_exit_reason = 150994968}, fail_entry = {hardware_entry_failure_reason = 150994968}, ex = { exception = 150994968, error_code = 0}, io = {direction = 24 '\030', size = 0 '\000', port = 2304, count = 0, data_offset = 144}, debug = {arch = {<No data fields>}}, mmio = {phys_addr = 150994968, data = "\220\000\000\000\000\000\000", len = 4, is_write = 0 '\000'}, hypercall = {nr = 150994968, args = {144, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0}, ret = 0, longmode = 0, pad = 0}, tpr_access = {rip = 150994968, is_write = 144, pad = 0}, s390_sieic = {icptcode = 24 '\030', ipa = 2304, ipb = 0}, s390_reset_flags = 150994968, s390_ucontrol = {trans_exc_code = 150994968, pgm_code = 144}, dcr = { dcrn = 150994968, data = 0, is_write = 144 '\220'}, internal = {suberror = 150994968, ndata = 0, data = {144, 4, 0 <repeats 14 times>}}, osi = {gprs = {150994968, 144, 4, 0 <repeats 29 times>}}, papr_hcall = {nr = 150994968, ret = 144, args = {4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}}, s390_tsch = { subchannel_id = 24, subchannel_nr = 2304, io_int_parm = 0, io_int_word = 144, ipb = 0, dequeued = 4 '\004'}, epr = {epr = 150994968}, system_event = {type = 150994968, flags = 144}, s390_stsi = {addr = 150994968, ar = 144 '\220', reserved = 0 '\000', fc = 0 '\000', sel1 = 0 '\000', sel2 = 0}, padding = "\030\000\000\t\000\000\000\000\220\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\004", '\000' <repeats 238 times>}, kvm_valid_regs = 0, kvm_dirty_regs = 0, s = {regs = {<No data fields>}, padding = '\000' <repeats 2047 times>}} Marc, does it ring any bell? Paolo diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c index 268d14d..d2011d0 100644 --- a/aio-posix.c +++ b/aio-posix.c @@ -273,6 +273,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) aio_context_acquire(ctx); } + /* This should be optimized... */ + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); + + if (blocking) { + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); + } + /* if we have any readable fds, dispatch event */ if (ret > 0) { for (i = 0; i < npfd; i++) { @@ -283,10 +290,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) npfd = 0; ctx->walking_handlers--; - if (blocking) { - atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); - } - /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { progress = true; diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c index 2bfd5f8..33809fd 100644 --- a/aio-win32.c +++ b/aio-win32.c @@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) if (timeout) { aio_context_acquire(ctx); } + + /* This should be optimized... */ + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); + if (blocking) { assert(first); atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); diff --git a/async.c b/async.c index 9204907..120e183 100644 --- a/async.c +++ b/async.c @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; QEMUBH *bh; + /* This should be optimized... */ + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); + atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { @@ -280,6 +280,10 @@ static void aio_rfifolock_cb(void *opaque) aio_notify(opaque); } +static void event_notifier_dummy_cb(EventNotifier *e) +{ +} + AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) { int ret; @@ -292,7 +296,7 @@ AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) return NULL; } g_source_set_can_recurse(&ctx->source, true); - aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, NULL); + aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, event_notifier_dummy_cb); ctx->thread_pool = NULL; qemu_mutex_init(&ctx->bh_lock); rfifolock_init(&ctx->lock, aio_rfifolock_cb, ctx); ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 9:30 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 12:58 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 13:02 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: kwolf, Marc Zyngier, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:30:38AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > error: kvm run failed Function not implemented > PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 > X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 > X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a > X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 > X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 > X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 > X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 > X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 > X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) Vaguely reminiscent of this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194366 (See comment 7 in particular) > diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c > index 268d14d..d2011d0 100644 > --- a/aio-posix.c > +++ b/aio-posix.c > @@ -273,6 +273,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > aio_context_acquire(ctx); > } > > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > + if (blocking) { > + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > + } > + > /* if we have any readable fds, dispatch event */ > if (ret > 0) { > for (i = 0; i < npfd; i++) { > @@ -283,10 +290,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > npfd = 0; > ctx->walking_handlers--; > > - if (blocking) { > - atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > - } > - > /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ > if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { > progress = true; > diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c > index 2bfd5f8..33809fd 100644 > --- a/aio-win32.c > +++ b/aio-win32.c > @@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > if (timeout) { > aio_context_acquire(ctx); > } > + > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > if (blocking) { > assert(first); > atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > diff --git a/async.c b/async.c > index 9204907..120e183 100644 > --- a/async.c > +++ b/async.c > @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) > AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; > QEMUBH *bh; > > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); > for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { > if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { > @@ -280,6 +280,10 @@ static void aio_rfifolock_cb(void *opaque) > aio_notify(opaque); > } > > +static void event_notifier_dummy_cb(EventNotifier *e) > +{ > +} > + > AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) > { > int ret; > @@ -292,7 +296,7 @@ AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) > return NULL; > } > g_source_set_can_recurse(&ctx->source, true); > - aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, NULL); > + aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, event_notifier_dummy_cb); > ctx->thread_pool = NULL; > qemu_mutex_init(&ctx->bh_lock); > rfifolock_init(&ctx->lock, aio_rfifolock_cb, ctx); With this patch, I've got to 500 iterations without seeing the error. Still testing it however ... Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 12:58 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 13:02 ` Paolo Bonzini 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones; +Cc: kwolf, Marc Zyngier, lersek, qemu-devel, stefanha On 17/07/2015 14:58, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:30:38AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> error: kvm run failed Function not implemented >> PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 >> X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 >> X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a >> X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 >> X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 >> X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 >> X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 >> X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 >> X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) > > Vaguely reminiscent of this bug: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194366 > > (See comment 7 in particular) Must be it, I was using an old kernel. Thanks! Paolo >> diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c >> index 268d14d..d2011d0 100644 >> --- a/aio-posix.c >> +++ b/aio-posix.c >> @@ -273,6 +273,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> aio_context_acquire(ctx); >> } >> >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> + if (blocking) { >> + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> + } >> + >> /* if we have any readable fds, dispatch event */ >> if (ret > 0) { >> for (i = 0; i < npfd; i++) { >> @@ -283,10 +290,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> npfd = 0; >> ctx->walking_handlers--; >> >> - if (blocking) { >> - atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> - } >> - >> /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ >> if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { >> progress = true; >> diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c >> index 2bfd5f8..33809fd 100644 >> --- a/aio-win32.c >> +++ b/aio-win32.c >> @@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> if (timeout) { >> aio_context_acquire(ctx); >> } >> + >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> if (blocking) { >> assert(first); >> atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> diff --git a/async.c b/async.c >> index 9204907..120e183 100644 >> --- a/async.c >> +++ b/async.c >> @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) >> AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; >> QEMUBH *bh; >> >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); >> for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { >> if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { >> @@ -280,6 +280,10 @@ static void aio_rfifolock_cb(void *opaque) >> aio_notify(opaque); >> } >> >> +static void event_notifier_dummy_cb(EventNotifier *e) >> +{ >> +} >> + >> AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) >> { >> int ret; >> @@ -292,7 +296,7 @@ AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) >> return NULL; >> } >> g_source_set_can_recurse(&ctx->source, true); >> - aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, NULL); >> + aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, event_notifier_dummy_cb); >> ctx->thread_pool = NULL; >> qemu_mutex_init(&ctx->bh_lock); >> rfifolock_init(&ctx->lock, aio_rfifolock_cb, ctx); > > With this patch, I've got to 500 iterations without seeing the error. > > Still testing it however ... > > Rich. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 9:30 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 12:58 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:39 ` Laszlo Ersek 2015-07-17 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, lersek@redhat.com, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:30:38 +0100 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 17/07/2015 06:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> > >> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is > >> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens > >> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs > >> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. > >> > >> It's the exact same hang in both cases. > >> > >> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? > >> > >> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. > > > > Would seem at first glance like a different bug. > > > > Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug > > more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding > > other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). > > > > Perhaps this: > > > > i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > lock_iothread > > notify_me = 1 > > ... > > unlock_iothread > > lock_iothread > > notify_me = 3 > > ppoll > > notify_me = 1 > > bh->scheduled = 1 > > event_notifier_set > > event_notifier_test_and_clear > > ppoll > > ^^ hang > > > > In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but > > perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. > > > > The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is > > not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. > > > > Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before > > aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close > > > > However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty > > expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the > > other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race > > very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a > > successful test really says anything useful. > > So it may not be useful, but still successful test is successful. :) > The following patch, which also includes the delta between v2 and v3 > of this series, survived 674 reboots before hitting a definitely > unrelated problem: > > error: kvm run failed Function not implemented > PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 > X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 > X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a > X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 > X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 > X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 > X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 > X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 > X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) > > For the record, this is the kvm_run struct: > > $6 = {request_interrupt_window = 0 '\000', padding1 = "\000\000\000\000\000\000", exit_reason = 0, > ready_for_interrupt_injection = 0 '\000', if_flag = 0 '\000', flags = 0, cr8 = 0, apic_base = 0, {hw = { > hardware_exit_reason = 150994968}, fail_entry = {hardware_entry_failure_reason = 150994968}, ex = { > exception = 150994968, error_code = 0}, io = {direction = 24 '\030', size = 0 '\000', port = 2304, > count = 0, data_offset = 144}, debug = {arch = {<No data fields>}}, mmio = {phys_addr = 150994968, > data = "\220\000\000\000\000\000\000", len = 4, is_write = 0 '\000'}, hypercall = {nr = 150994968, > args = {144, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0}, ret = 0, longmode = 0, pad = 0}, tpr_access = {rip = 150994968, > is_write = 144, pad = 0}, s390_sieic = {icptcode = 24 '\030', ipa = 2304, ipb = 0}, > s390_reset_flags = 150994968, s390_ucontrol = {trans_exc_code = 150994968, pgm_code = 144}, dcr = { > dcrn = 150994968, data = 0, is_write = 144 '\220'}, internal = {suberror = 150994968, ndata = 0, > data = {144, 4, 0 <repeats 14 times>}}, osi = {gprs = {150994968, 144, 4, 0 <repeats 29 times>}}, > papr_hcall = {nr = 150994968, ret = 144, args = {4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}}, s390_tsch = { > subchannel_id = 24, subchannel_nr = 2304, io_int_parm = 0, io_int_word = 144, ipb = 0, > dequeued = 4 '\004'}, epr = {epr = 150994968}, system_event = {type = 150994968, flags = 144}, > s390_stsi = {addr = 150994968, ar = 144 '\220', reserved = 0 '\000', fc = 0 '\000', sel1 = 0 '\000', > sel2 = 0}, > padding = "\030\000\000\t\000\000\000\000\220\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\004", '\000' <repeats 238 times>}, kvm_valid_regs = 0, kvm_dirty_regs = 0, s = {regs = {<No data fields>}, > padding = '\000' <repeats 2047 times>}} > > Marc, does it ring any bell? Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load multiple, for example). In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the registers. What looks a bit weird is that all the registers are clamped to 32bit, but the PSTATE indicates it is running in 64bit (EL1h, which makes the PC being utterly wrong). What are you running there? Thanks, M. > Paolo > > diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c > index 268d14d..d2011d0 100644 > --- a/aio-posix.c > +++ b/aio-posix.c > @@ -273,6 +273,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > aio_context_acquire(ctx); > } > > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > + if (blocking) { > + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > + } > + > /* if we have any readable fds, dispatch event */ > if (ret > 0) { > for (i = 0; i < npfd; i++) { > @@ -283,10 +290,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > npfd = 0; > ctx->walking_handlers--; > > - if (blocking) { > - atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > - } > - > /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ > if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { > progress = true; > diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c > index 2bfd5f8..33809fd 100644 > --- a/aio-win32.c > +++ b/aio-win32.c > @@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) > if (timeout) { > aio_context_acquire(ctx); > } > + > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > if (blocking) { > assert(first); > atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); > diff --git a/async.c b/async.c > index 9204907..120e183 100644 > --- a/async.c > +++ b/async.c > @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) > AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; > QEMUBH *bh; > > + /* This should be optimized... */ > + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); > + > atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); > for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { > if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { > @@ -280,6 +280,10 @@ static void aio_rfifolock_cb(void *opaque) > aio_notify(opaque); > } > > +static void event_notifier_dummy_cb(EventNotifier *e) > +{ > +} > + > AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) > { > int ret; > @@ -292,7 +296,7 @@ AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) > return NULL; > } > g_source_set_can_recurse(&ctx->source, true); > - aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, NULL); > + aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, event_notifier_dummy_cb); > ctx->thread_pool = NULL; > qemu_mutex_init(&ctx->bh_lock); > rfifolock_init(&ctx->lock, aio_rfifolock_cb, ctx); > -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 13:39 ` Laszlo Ersek 2015-07-17 13:48 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Laszlo Ersek @ 2015-07-17 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier, Paolo Bonzini Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 07/17/15 15:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:30:38 +0100 > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 17/07/2015 06:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>> >>>> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is >>>> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens >>>> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs >>>> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. >>>> >>>> It's the exact same hang in both cases. >>>> >>>> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? >>>> >>>> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. >>> >>> Would seem at first glance like a different bug. >>> >>> Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug >>> more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding >>> other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). >>> >>> Perhaps this: >>> >>> i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> lock_iothread >>> notify_me = 1 >>> ... >>> unlock_iothread >>> lock_iothread >>> notify_me = 3 >>> ppoll >>> notify_me = 1 >>> bh->scheduled = 1 >>> event_notifier_set >>> event_notifier_test_and_clear >>> ppoll >>> ^^ hang >>> >>> In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but >>> perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. >>> >>> The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is >>> not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. >>> >>> Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before >>> aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close >>> >>> However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty >>> expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the >>> other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race >>> very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a >>> successful test really says anything useful. >> >> So it may not be useful, but still successful test is successful. :) >> The following patch, which also includes the delta between v2 and v3 >> of this series, survived 674 reboots before hitting a definitely >> unrelated problem: >> >> error: kvm run failed Function not implemented >> PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 >> X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 >> X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a >> X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 >> X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 >> X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 >> X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 >> X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 >> X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) >> >> For the record, this is the kvm_run struct: >> >> $6 = {request_interrupt_window = 0 '\000', padding1 = "\000\000\000\000\000\000", exit_reason = 0, >> ready_for_interrupt_injection = 0 '\000', if_flag = 0 '\000', flags = 0, cr8 = 0, apic_base = 0, {hw = { >> hardware_exit_reason = 150994968}, fail_entry = {hardware_entry_failure_reason = 150994968}, ex = { >> exception = 150994968, error_code = 0}, io = {direction = 24 '\030', size = 0 '\000', port = 2304, >> count = 0, data_offset = 144}, debug = {arch = {<No data fields>}}, mmio = {phys_addr = 150994968, >> data = "\220\000\000\000\000\000\000", len = 4, is_write = 0 '\000'}, hypercall = {nr = 150994968, >> args = {144, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0}, ret = 0, longmode = 0, pad = 0}, tpr_access = {rip = 150994968, >> is_write = 144, pad = 0}, s390_sieic = {icptcode = 24 '\030', ipa = 2304, ipb = 0}, >> s390_reset_flags = 150994968, s390_ucontrol = {trans_exc_code = 150994968, pgm_code = 144}, dcr = { >> dcrn = 150994968, data = 0, is_write = 144 '\220'}, internal = {suberror = 150994968, ndata = 0, >> data = {144, 4, 0 <repeats 14 times>}}, osi = {gprs = {150994968, 144, 4, 0 <repeats 29 times>}}, >> papr_hcall = {nr = 150994968, ret = 144, args = {4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}}, s390_tsch = { >> subchannel_id = 24, subchannel_nr = 2304, io_int_parm = 0, io_int_word = 144, ipb = 0, >> dequeued = 4 '\004'}, epr = {epr = 150994968}, system_event = {type = 150994968, flags = 144}, >> s390_stsi = {addr = 150994968, ar = 144 '\220', reserved = 0 '\000', fc = 0 '\000', sel1 = 0 '\000', >> sel2 = 0}, >> padding = "\030\000\000\t\000\000\000\000\220\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\004", '\000' <repeats 238 times>}, kvm_valid_regs = 0, kvm_dirty_regs = 0, s = {regs = {<No data fields>}, >> padding = '\000' <repeats 2047 times>}} >> >> Marc, does it ring any bell? > > Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an > instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load > multiple, for example). > > In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). > > This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points > there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the > registers. [VIRT_UART] = { 0x09000000, 0x00001000 }, Thanks Laszlo > > What looks a bit weird is that all the registers are clamped to 32bit, > but the PSTATE indicates it is running in 64bit (EL1h, which makes the > PC being utterly wrong). > > What are you running there? > > Thanks, > > M. > >> Paolo >> >> diff --git a/aio-posix.c b/aio-posix.c >> index 268d14d..d2011d0 100644 >> --- a/aio-posix.c >> +++ b/aio-posix.c >> @@ -273,6 +273,13 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> aio_context_acquire(ctx); >> } >> >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> + if (blocking) { >> + atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> + } >> + >> /* if we have any readable fds, dispatch event */ >> if (ret > 0) { >> for (i = 0; i < npfd; i++) { >> @@ -283,10 +290,6 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> npfd = 0; >> ctx->walking_handlers--; >> >> - if (blocking) { >> - atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> - } >> - >> /* Run dispatch even if there were no readable fds to run timers */ >> if (aio_dispatch(ctx)) { >> progress = true; >> diff --git a/aio-win32.c b/aio-win32.c >> index 2bfd5f8..33809fd 100644 >> --- a/aio-win32.c >> +++ b/aio-win32.c >> @@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ bool aio_poll(AioContext *ctx, bool blocking) >> if (timeout) { >> aio_context_acquire(ctx); >> } >> + >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> if (blocking) { >> assert(first); >> atomic_sub(&ctx->notify_me, 2); >> diff --git a/async.c b/async.c >> index 9204907..120e183 100644 >> --- a/async.c >> +++ b/async.c >> @@ -202,6 +202,9 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source) >> AioContext *ctx = (AioContext *) source; >> QEMUBH *bh; >> >> + /* This should be optimized... */ >> + event_notifier_test_and_clear(&ctx->notifier); >> + >> atomic_and(&ctx->notify_me, ~1); >> for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) { >> if (!bh->deleted && bh->scheduled) { >> @@ -280,6 +280,10 @@ static void aio_rfifolock_cb(void *opaque) >> aio_notify(opaque); >> } >> >> +static void event_notifier_dummy_cb(EventNotifier *e) >> +{ >> +} >> + >> AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) >> { >> int ret; >> @@ -292,7 +296,7 @@ AioContext *aio_context_new(Error **errp) >> return NULL; >> } >> g_source_set_can_recurse(&ctx->source, true); >> - aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, NULL); >> + aio_set_event_notifier(ctx, &ctx->notifier, event_notifier_dummy_cb); >> ctx->thread_pool = NULL; >> qemu_mutex_init(&ctx->bh_lock); >> rfifolock_init(&ctx->lock, aio_rfifolock_cb, ctx); >> > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:39 ` Laszlo Ersek @ 2015-07-17 13:48 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:53 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 13:57 ` Laszlo Ersek 0 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Paolo Bonzini, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:39:55 +0100 Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote: > On 07/17/15 15:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:30:38 +0100 > > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 17/07/2015 06:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is > >>>> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens > >>>> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs > >>>> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. > >>>> > >>>> It's the exact same hang in both cases. > >>>> > >>>> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? > >>>> > >>>> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. > >>> > >>> Would seem at first glance like a different bug. > >>> > >>> Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug > >>> more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding > >>> other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). > >>> > >>> Perhaps this: > >>> > >>> i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> lock_iothread > >>> notify_me = 1 > >>> ... > >>> unlock_iothread > >>> lock_iothread > >>> notify_me = 3 > >>> ppoll > >>> notify_me = 1 > >>> bh->scheduled = 1 > >>> event_notifier_set > >>> event_notifier_test_and_clear > >>> ppoll > >>> ^^ hang > >>> > >>> In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but > >>> perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. > >>> > >>> The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is > >>> not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. > >>> > >>> Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before > >>> aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close > >>> > >>> However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty > >>> expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the > >>> other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race > >>> very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a > >>> successful test really says anything useful. > >> > >> So it may not be useful, but still successful test is successful. :) > >> The following patch, which also includes the delta between v2 and v3 > >> of this series, survived 674 reboots before hitting a definitely > >> unrelated problem: > >> > >> error: kvm run failed Function not implemented > >> PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 > >> X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 > >> X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a > >> X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 > >> X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 > >> X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 > >> X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 > >> X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 > >> X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) > >> > >> For the record, this is the kvm_run struct: > >> > >> $6 = {request_interrupt_window = 0 '\000', padding1 = "\000\000\000\000\000\000", exit_reason = 0, > >> ready_for_interrupt_injection = 0 '\000', if_flag = 0 '\000', flags = 0, cr8 = 0, apic_base = 0, {hw = { > >> hardware_exit_reason = 150994968}, fail_entry = {hardware_entry_failure_reason = 150994968}, ex = { > >> exception = 150994968, error_code = 0}, io = {direction = 24 '\030', size = 0 '\000', port = 2304, > >> count = 0, data_offset = 144}, debug = {arch = {<No data fields>}}, mmio = {phys_addr = 150994968, > >> data = "\220\000\000\000\000\000\000", len = 4, is_write = 0 '\000'}, hypercall = {nr = 150994968, > >> args = {144, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0}, ret = 0, longmode = 0, pad = 0}, tpr_access = {rip = 150994968, > >> is_write = 144, pad = 0}, s390_sieic = {icptcode = 24 '\030', ipa = 2304, ipb = 0}, > >> s390_reset_flags = 150994968, s390_ucontrol = {trans_exc_code = 150994968, pgm_code = 144}, dcr = { > >> dcrn = 150994968, data = 0, is_write = 144 '\220'}, internal = {suberror = 150994968, ndata = 0, > >> data = {144, 4, 0 <repeats 14 times>}}, osi = {gprs = {150994968, 144, 4, 0 <repeats 29 times>}}, > >> papr_hcall = {nr = 150994968, ret = 144, args = {4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}}, s390_tsch = { > >> subchannel_id = 24, subchannel_nr = 2304, io_int_parm = 0, io_int_word = 144, ipb = 0, > >> dequeued = 4 '\004'}, epr = {epr = 150994968}, system_event = {type = 150994968, flags = 144}, > >> s390_stsi = {addr = 150994968, ar = 144 '\220', reserved = 0 '\000', fc = 0 '\000', sel1 = 0 '\000', > >> sel2 = 0}, > >> padding = "\030\000\000\t\000\000\000\000\220\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\004", '\000' <repeats 238 times>}, kvm_valid_regs = 0, kvm_dirty_regs = 0, s = {regs = {<No data fields>}, > >> padding = '\000' <repeats 2047 times>}} > >> > >> Marc, does it ring any bell? > > > > Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an > > instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load > > multiple, for example). > > > > In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). > > > > This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points > > there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the > > registers. > > [VIRT_UART] = { 0x09000000, 0x00001000 }, > Still: there is nothing in the registers that remotely points to that area. X0 is the closest, but it'd take a big negative offset to get there. Is that a Linux kernel? or something else? M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:48 ` Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 13:53 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 14:03 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:57 ` Laszlo Ersek 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 13:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Paolo Bonzini, Laszlo Ersek, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 02:48:40PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Still: there is nothing in the registers that remotely points to that > area. X0 is the closest, but it'd take a big negative offset to get > there. > > Is that a Linux kernel? or something else? You're sure it's not this one? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194366 That was caused by ftrace screwing up guest memory, so it was effectively running random code. It is also fixed (by you in fact). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:53 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 14:03 ` Marc Zyngier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard W.M. Jones Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Paolo Bonzini, Laszlo Ersek, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:53:06 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 02:48:40PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Still: there is nothing in the registers that remotely points to that > > area. X0 is the closest, but it'd take a big negative offset to get > > there. > > > > Is that a Linux kernel? or something else? > > You're sure it's not this one? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194366 > That was caused by ftrace screwing up guest memory, so it was > effectively running random code. It is also fixed (by you in fact). Don't think so. The bug you quote was the guest kernel being buggy, and touching non-memory space. This new issue seems different - this is not a Linux kernel, by the look of it. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:48 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:53 ` Richard W.M. Jones @ 2015-07-17 13:57 ` Laszlo Ersek 1 sibling, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Laszlo Ersek @ 2015-07-17 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Paolo Bonzini, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 07/17/15 15:48, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:39:55 +0100 > Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 07/17/15 15:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:30:38 +0100 >>> Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 17/07/2015 06:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16/07/2015 21:05, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry to spoil things, but I'm still seeing this bug, although it is >>>>>> now a lot less frequent with your patch. I would estimate it happens >>>>>> more often than 1 in 5 runs with qemu.git, and probably 1 in 200 runs >>>>>> with qemu.git + the v2 patch series. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's the exact same hang in both cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it possible that this patch doesn't completely close any race? >>>>>> >>>>>> Still, it is an improvement, so there is that. >>>>> >>>>> Would seem at first glance like a different bug. >>>>> >>>>> Interestingly, adding some "tracing" (qemu_clock_get_ns) makes the bug >>>>> more likely: now it reproduces in about 10 tries. Of course :) adding >>>>> other kinds of tracing instead make it go away again (>50 tries). >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps this: >>>>> >>>>> i/o thread vcpu thread worker thread >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> lock_iothread >>>>> notify_me = 1 >>>>> ... >>>>> unlock_iothread >>>>> lock_iothread >>>>> notify_me = 3 >>>>> ppoll >>>>> notify_me = 1 >>>>> bh->scheduled = 1 >>>>> event_notifier_set >>>>> event_notifier_test_and_clear >>>>> ppoll >>>>> ^^ hang >>>>> >>>>> In the exact shape above, it doesn't seem too likely to happen, but >>>>> perhaps there's another simpler case. Still, the bug exists. >>>>> >>>>> The above is not really related to notify_me. Here the notification is >>>>> not being optimized away! So I wonder if this one has been there forever. >>>>> >>>>> Fam suggested putting the event_notifier_test_and_clear before >>>>> aio_bh_poll(), but it does not work. I'll look more close >>>>> >>>>> However, an unconditional event_notifier_test_and_clear is pretty >>>>> expensive. On one hand, obviously correctness comes first. On the >>>>> other hand, an expensive operation at the wrong place can mask the race >>>>> very easily; I'll let the fix run for a while, but I'm not sure if a >>>>> successful test really says anything useful. >>>> >>>> So it may not be useful, but still successful test is successful. :) >>>> The following patch, which also includes the delta between v2 and v3 >>>> of this series, survived 674 reboots before hitting a definitely >>>> unrelated problem: >>>> >>>> error: kvm run failed Function not implemented >>>> PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 >>>> X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 >>>> X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a >>>> X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 >>>> X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 >>>> X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 >>>> X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 >>>> X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 >>>> X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) >>>> >>>> For the record, this is the kvm_run struct: >>>> >>>> $6 = {request_interrupt_window = 0 '\000', padding1 = "\000\000\000\000\000\000", exit_reason = 0, >>>> ready_for_interrupt_injection = 0 '\000', if_flag = 0 '\000', flags = 0, cr8 = 0, apic_base = 0, {hw = { >>>> hardware_exit_reason = 150994968}, fail_entry = {hardware_entry_failure_reason = 150994968}, ex = { >>>> exception = 150994968, error_code = 0}, io = {direction = 24 '\030', size = 0 '\000', port = 2304, >>>> count = 0, data_offset = 144}, debug = {arch = {<No data fields>}}, mmio = {phys_addr = 150994968, >>>> data = "\220\000\000\000\000\000\000", len = 4, is_write = 0 '\000'}, hypercall = {nr = 150994968, >>>> args = {144, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0}, ret = 0, longmode = 0, pad = 0}, tpr_access = {rip = 150994968, >>>> is_write = 144, pad = 0}, s390_sieic = {icptcode = 24 '\030', ipa = 2304, ipb = 0}, >>>> s390_reset_flags = 150994968, s390_ucontrol = {trans_exc_code = 150994968, pgm_code = 144}, dcr = { >>>> dcrn = 150994968, data = 0, is_write = 144 '\220'}, internal = {suberror = 150994968, ndata = 0, >>>> data = {144, 4, 0 <repeats 14 times>}}, osi = {gprs = {150994968, 144, 4, 0 <repeats 29 times>}}, >>>> papr_hcall = {nr = 150994968, ret = 144, args = {4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}}, s390_tsch = { >>>> subchannel_id = 24, subchannel_nr = 2304, io_int_parm = 0, io_int_word = 144, ipb = 0, >>>> dequeued = 4 '\004'}, epr = {epr = 150994968}, system_event = {type = 150994968, flags = 144}, >>>> s390_stsi = {addr = 150994968, ar = 144 '\220', reserved = 0 '\000', fc = 0 '\000', sel1 = 0 '\000', >>>> sel2 = 0}, >>>> padding = "\030\000\000\t\000\000\000\000\220\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\004", '\000' <repeats 238 times>}, kvm_valid_regs = 0, kvm_dirty_regs = 0, s = {regs = {<No data fields>}, >>>> padding = '\000' <repeats 2047 times>}} >>>> >>>> Marc, does it ring any bell? >>> >>> Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an >>> instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load >>> multiple, for example). >>> >>> In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). >>> >>> This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points >>> there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the >>> registers. >> >> [VIRT_UART] = { 0x09000000, 0x00001000 }, >> > > Still: there is nothing in the registers that remotely points to that > area. X0 is the closest, but it'd take a big negative offset to get > there. > > Is that a Linux kernel? or something else? Assuming I managed to decipher the nesting of the contexts, the register dump was pasted by Paolo. IIRC Paolo has been using the guest firmware (the ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc platform build in edk2, also known as "AAVMF" sometimes) to reproduce the issue. Thanks Laszlo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:39 ` Laszlo Ersek @ 2015-07-17 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 14:18 ` Marc Zyngier 1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, lersek@redhat.com, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 17/07/2015 15:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > Marc, does it ring any bell? > Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an > instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load > multiple, for example). > > In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). Yup, I later found this in the dmesg: [1875219.903969] kvm [14843]: load/store instruction decoding not implemented > This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points > there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the > registers. 0x9000018 is the pl011, which makes some sense. Have you ever seen a corrupted register dump? The guest RAM goes from 0x40000000 to 0xbfffffff, so SP is pointing outside memory. > > PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 > > X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 > > X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a > > X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 > > X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 > > X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 > > X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 > > X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 > > X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) If the register dump is not corrupted, execution went in the weeds... I don't have the guest anymore but it's just firmware so the memory contents are well reproducible: 0x00000000bf671200: a97d6ffa ldmdbge sp!, {r1, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, fp, sp, lr}^ 0x00000000bf671204: a97e77fc ldmdbge lr!, {r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, ip, sp, lr}^ 0x00000000bf671208: f85f03fe undefined instruction 0xf85f03fe 0x00000000bf67120c: 910803ff strdls r0, [r8, -pc] 0x00000000bf671210: ad7007e0 ldclge 7, cr0, [r0, #-896]! 0x00000000bf671214: ad710fe2 ldclge 15, cr0, [r1, #-904]! 0x00000000bf671218: ad7217e4 ldclge 7, cr1, [r2, #-912]! 0x00000000bf67121c: ad731fe6 ldclge 15, cr1, [r3, #-920]! 0x00000000bf671220: ad7427e8 ldclge 7, cr2, [r4, #-928]! 0x00000000bf671224: ad752fea ldclge 15, cr2, [r5, #-936]! > What looks a bit weird is that all the registers are clamped to 32bit, > but the PSTATE indicates it is running in 64bit (EL1h, which makes the > PC being utterly wrong). The PC can be okay since UEFI code doesn't really use virtual addressing, but the other registers are weird indeed. > What are you running there? Just firmware. It's a UEFI reboot loop (as soon as you get to the UEFI shell QEMU exits and the script starts a new one). The kernel is an old 3.19 one, I'll upgrade and retest. Paolo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me 2015-07-17 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini @ 2015-07-17 14:18 ` Marc Zyngier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2015-07-17 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, lersek@redhat.com, Richard W.M. Jones, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:04:27 +0100 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 17/07/2015 15:28, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > > > Marc, does it ring any bell? > > Well, this is an example of a guest accessing non-memory using an > > instruction that we cannot safely emulate - not an IO accessor (load > > multiple, for example). > > > > In this case, we kill the guest (we could as well inject a fault). > > Yup, I later found this in the dmesg: > > [1875219.903969] kvm [14843]: load/store instruction decoding not implemented > > > This vcpu seems to be accessing 0x9000018 (the mmio structure points > > there), but I can't immediately relate it to the content of the > > registers. > > 0x9000018 is the pl011, which makes some sense. > > Have you ever seen a corrupted register dump? The guest RAM goes > from 0x40000000 to 0xbfffffff, so SP is pointing outside memory. I've never seen such a corruption - so far. > > > PC=00000000bf671210 SP=00000000c00001f0 > > > X00=000000000a003e70 X01=0000000000000000 X02=00000000bf680548 X03=0000000000000030 > > > X04=00000000bbb5fc18 X05=00000000004b7770 X06=00000000bf721930 X07=000000000000009a > > > X08=00000000bf716858 X09=0000000000000090 X10=0000000000000000 X11=0000000000000046 > > > X12=00000000a007e03a X13=0000000000000000 X14=0000000000000000 X15=0000000000000000 > > > X16=00000000bf716df0 X17=0000000000000000 X18=0000000000000000 X19=00000000bf6f5f18 > > > X20=0000000000000000 X21=0000000000000000 X22=0000000000000000 X23=0000000000000000 > > > X24=0000000000000000 X25=0000000000000000 X26=0000000000000000 X27=0000000000000000 > > > X28=0000000000000000 X29=0000000000000000 X30=0000000000000000 PSTATE=60000305 (flags -ZC-) > > If the register dump is not corrupted, execution went in the weeds... > I don't have the guest anymore but it's just firmware so the memory > contents are well reproducible: > > 0x00000000bf671200: a97d6ffa ldmdbge sp!, {r1, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, fp, sp, lr}^ > 0x00000000bf671204: a97e77fc ldmdbge lr!, {r2, r3, r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, ip, sp, lr}^ > 0x00000000bf671208: f85f03fe undefined instruction 0xf85f03fe > 0x00000000bf67120c: 910803ff strdls r0, [r8, -pc] > 0x00000000bf671210: ad7007e0 ldclge 7, cr0, [r0, #-896]! > 0x00000000bf671214: ad710fe2 ldclge 15, cr0, [r1, #-904]! > 0x00000000bf671218: ad7217e4 ldclge 7, cr1, [r2, #-912]! > 0x00000000bf67121c: ad731fe6 ldclge 15, cr1, [r3, #-920]! > 0x00000000bf671220: ad7427e8 ldclge 7, cr2, [r4, #-928]! > 0x00000000bf671224: ad752fea ldclge 15, cr2, [r5, #-936]! But that's all 32bit code, and your guest was running in 64bit. What does it look like as A64? > > What looks a bit weird is that all the registers are clamped to 32bit, > > but the PSTATE indicates it is running in 64bit (EL1h, which makes the > > PC being utterly wrong). > > The PC can be okay since UEFI code doesn't really use virtual addressing, > but the other registers are weird indeed. It definitely looks like something tramped on your register file. KVM doesn't do that at all (we use the whole AArch64 register file irrespective of the execution state). Is your UEFI guest 32 or 64bit? M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-07-20 16:17 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-07-18 20:21 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tests: remove irrelevant assertions from test-aio Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] aio-win32: reorganize polling loop Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-18 20:21 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] AioContext: fix broken ctx->dispatching optimization Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-19 10:08 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] AioContext: ctx->dispatching is dead, all hail ctx->notify_me Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-20 16:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2015-07-16 9:56 Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-16 11:07 ` Kevin Wolf 2015-07-16 12:44 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 19:05 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-16 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 0:17 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 4:44 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 9:30 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 12:58 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 13:02 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 13:28 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:39 ` Laszlo Ersek 2015-07-17 13:48 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:53 ` Richard W.M. Jones 2015-07-17 14:03 ` Marc Zyngier 2015-07-17 13:57 ` Laszlo Ersek 2015-07-17 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini 2015-07-17 14:18 ` Marc Zyngier
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).