From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60724)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlIzy-0002Pg-Be
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:48:24 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlIzr-00035G-Hc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:48:18 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36751)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlIzr-00035A-9c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:48:11 -0500
Message-ID: <5294A68F.6060301@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:47:59 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D3E216785288A145B7BC975F83A2ED10448ADCCB@SZXEMA510-MBS.china.huawei.com>
	<52949847.6020908@redhat.com>
	<CAEbWaipAnmoa=gMbB1aNb=btU6LgYXhcnmQWHJ_89m4yvw6Dug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEbWaipAnmoa=gMbB1aNb=btU6LgYXhcnmQWHJ_89m4yvw6Dug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] create a single workqueue for each vm to
 update vm irq routing table
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi.kivity@gmail.com>
Cc: "Huangweidong (C)" <weidong.huang@huawei.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, "Jinxin (F)" <jinxin712@huawei.com>, "Zhanghaoyu (A)" <haoyu.zhang@huawei.com>, Luonengjun <luonengjun@huawei.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Zanghongyong <zanghongyong@huawei.com>

Il 26/11/2013 14:18, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
> 
>> I don't think a workqueue is even needed.  You just need to use call_rcu
>> to free "old" after releasing kvm->irq_lock.
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> Can this cause an interrupt to be delivered to the wrong (old) vcpu?

No, this would be exactly the same code that is running now:

        mutex_lock(&kvm->irq_lock);
        old = kvm->irq_routing;
        kvm_irq_routing_update(kvm, new);
        mutex_unlock(&kvm->irq_lock);

        synchronize_rcu();
        kfree(old);
        return 0;

Except that the kfree would run in the call_rcu kernel thread instead of
the vcpu thread.  But the vcpus already see the new routing table after
the rcu_assign_pointer that is in kvm_irq_routing_update.

There is still the problem that Gleb pointed out, though.

Paolo

> The way Linux sets interrupt affinity, it cannot, since changing the
> affinity is (IIRC) done in the interrupt handler, so the next interrupt
> cannot be in flight and thus pick up the old interrupt routing table.
> 
> However it may be vulnerable in other ways.
> 
>