From: Roman Kagan <rkagan@virtuozzo.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] establish nesting rule of BQL vs cpu-exclusive
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 10:54:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190523105440.27045-1-rkagan@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
I came across the following AB-BA deadlock:
vCPU thread main thread
----------- -----------
async_safe_run_on_cpu(self,
async_synic_update)
... [cpu hot-add]
process_queued_cpu_work()
qemu_mutex_unlock_iothread()
[grab BQL]
start_exclusive() cpu_list_add()
async_synic_update() finish_safe_work()
qemu_mutex_lock_iothread() cpu_exec_start()
ATM async_synic_update seems to be the only async safe work item that
grabs BQL. However it isn't quite obvious that it shouldn't; in the
past there were more examples of this (e.g.
memory_region_do_invalidate_mmio_ptr).
It looks like the problem is generally in the lack of the nesting rule
for cpu-exclusive sections against BQL, so I thought I would try to
address that. This patchset is my feeble attempt at this; I'm not sure
I fully comprehend all the consequences (rather, I'm sure I don't) hence
RFC.
Roman Kagan (2):
cpus-common: nuke finish_safe_work
cpus-common: assert BQL nesting within cpu-exclusive sections
cpus-common.c | 12 ++++--------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--
2.21.0
next reply other threads:[~2019-05-23 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-23 10:54 Roman Kagan [this message]
2019-05-23 10:54 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/2] cpus-common: nuke finish_safe_work Roman Kagan
2019-06-24 10:58 ` Alex Bennée
2019-06-24 11:50 ` Roman Kagan
2019-06-24 12:43 ` Alex Bennée
2019-05-23 10:54 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/2] cpus-common: assert BQL nesting within cpu-exclusive sections Roman Kagan
2019-05-23 11:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] establish nesting rule of BQL vs cpu-exclusive Alex Bennée
2019-05-27 11:05 ` Roman Kagan
2019-06-06 13:22 ` Roman Kagan
2019-06-21 12:49 ` Roman Kagan
2019-08-05 12:47 ` Roman Kagan
2019-08-05 15:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=20190523105440.27045-1-rkagan@virtuozzo.com \
--to=rkagan@virtuozzo.com \
--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).