From: David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 21:21:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160915212142.5fd5048e@thinkpad-w530> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33773797-04ec-413f-7ba2-4bb7a4350a44@de.ibm.com>
> On 09/12/2016 08:03 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/09/2016 19:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >> On 09/12/2016 06:44 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>> I think that two CPUs doing reciprocal SIGPs could in principle end up
> >>> waiting on each other to complete their run_on_cpu. If the SIGP has to
> >>> be synchronous the fix is not trivial (you'd have to put the CPU in a
> >>> state similar to cpu->halted = 1), otherwise it's enough to replace
> >>> run_on_cpu with async_run_on_cpu.
> >>
> >> IIRC the sigps are supossed to be serialized by the big QEMU lock. WIll
> >> have a look.
> >
> > Yes, but run_on_cpu drops it when it waits on the qemu_work_cond
> > condition variable. (Related: I stumbled upon it because I wanted to
> > remove the BQL from run_on_cpu work items).
>
> Yes, seems you are right. If both CPUs have just exited from KVM doing a
> crossover sigp, they will do the arch_exit handling before the run_on_cpu
> stuff which might result in this hang. (luckily it seems quite unlikely
> but still we need to fix it).
> We cannot simply use async as the callbacks also provide the condition
> code for the initiater, so this requires some rework.
>
>
Smells like having to provide a lock per CPU. Trylock that lock, if that's not
possible, cc=busy. SIGP SET ARCHITECTURE has to lock all CPUs.
That was the initital design, until I realized that this was all protected by
the BQL.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-15 19:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-12 16:44 [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp? Paolo Bonzini
2016-09-12 17:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-09-12 18:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-09-13 13:06 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-09-15 19:21 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2016-09-15 20:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-09-19 8:15 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-09-19 11:25 ` David Hildenbrand
2016-09-19 11:45 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-09-20 11:57 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x/kvm: Fix potential deadlock in sigp handling Christian Borntraeger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160915212142.5fd5048e@thinkpad-w530 \
--to=dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).