From: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
To: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mttcg/i386: Patch instruction using async_safe_* framework
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:50:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vas1uqom.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487812814-17055-1-git-send-email-bobby.prani@gmail.com>
Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com> writes:
> In mttcg, calling pause_all_vcpus() during execution from the
> generated TBs causes a deadlock if some vCPU is waiting for exclusive
> execution in start_exclusive(). Fix this by using the aync_safe_*
> framework instead of pausing vcpus for patching instructions.
>
> CC: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
> CC: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> CC: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>
> ---
> hw/i386/kvmvapic.c | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c b/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> index 82a4955..15eb39d 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/kvmvapic.c
> @@ -383,8 +383,7 @@ static void patch_byte(X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong addr, uint8_t byte)
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(CPU(cpu), addr, &byte, 1, 1);
> }
>
> -static void patch_call(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip,
> - uint32_t target)
> +static void patch_call(X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip, uint32_t target)
> {
> uint32_t offset;
>
> @@ -393,17 +392,74 @@ static void patch_call(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip,
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(CPU(cpu), ip + 1, (void *)&offset, sizeof(offset), 1);
> }
>
> -static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> +struct PatchInfo {
> + VAPICHandlers *handler;
> + target_ulong ip;
> +};
> +
> +static void do_patch_instruction(CPUState *cs, run_on_cpu_data data)
> {
> - CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> - CPUX86State *env = &cpu->env;
> - VAPICHandlers *handlers;
> + X86CPU *x86_cpu = X86_CPU(cs);
> + CPUX86State *env = &x86_cpu->env;
> + struct PatchInfo *info = (struct PatchInfo *) data.host_ptr;
> + VAPICHandlers *handlers = info->handler;
> + target_ulong ip = info->ip;
> uint8_t opcode[2];
> uint32_t imm32 = 0;
> target_ulong current_pc = 0;
> target_ulong current_cs_base = 0;
> uint32_t current_flags = 0;
>
> + cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(env, ¤t_pc, ¤t_cs_base,
> + ¤t_flags);
> + /* Account this instruction, because we will exit the tb.
> + This is the first instruction in the block. Therefore
> + there is no need in restoring CPU state. */
> + if (use_icount) {
> + --cs->icount_decr.u16.low;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip, opcode, sizeof(opcode), 0);
> +
> + switch (opcode[0]) {
> + case 0x89: /* mov r32 to r/m32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x50 + modrm_reg(opcode[1])); /* push reg */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> + break;
> + case 0x8b: /* mov r/m32 to r32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x90);
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> + break;
> + case 0xa1: /* mov abs to eax */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> + break;
> + case 0xa3: /* mov eax to abs */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> + break;
> + case 0xc7: /* mov imm32, r/m32 (c7/0) */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x68); /* push imm32 */
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 6, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 0);
> + cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 1, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 1);
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> + break;
> + case 0xff: /* push r/m32 */
> + patch_byte(x86_cpu, ip, 0x50); /* push eax */
> + patch_call(x86_cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> + break;
> + default:
> + abort();
> + }
> +
> + g_free(info);
> +}
> +
> +static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> +{
> + CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> + VAPICHandlers *handlers;
> + uint8_t opcode[2];
> + uint32_t imm32 = 0;
> +
> if (smp_cpus == 1) {
> handlers = &s->rom_state.up;
> } else {
> @@ -411,14 +467,14 @@ static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> }
>
> if (!kvm_enabled()) {
> - cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(env, ¤t_pc, ¤t_cs_base,
> - ¤t_flags);
> - /* Account this instruction, because we will exit the tb.
> - This is the first instruction in the block. Therefore
> - there is no need in restoring CPU state. */
> - if (use_icount) {
> - --cs->icount_decr.u16.low;
> - }
> + struct PatchInfo *info = g_new(struct PatchInfo, 1);
> + const run_on_cpu_func fn = do_patch_instruction;
> + info->handler = handlers;
> + info->ip = ip;
> +
> + async_safe_run_on_cpu(cs, fn, RUN_ON_CPU_HOST_PTR(info));
> + cs->exception_index = EXCP_INTERRUPT;
> + cpu_loop_exit(cs);
So my only concern is has the path we've taken here ensured that all
registers have been updated before we leave the loop. That said we
previously called cpu_loop_exit_noexc() which has the lovely comment:
void cpu_loop_exit_noexc(CPUState *cpu)
{
/* XXX: restore cpu registers saved in host registers */
But the offloading of this work to async is the right approach.
> }
>
> pause_all_vcpus();
> @@ -428,41 +484,33 @@ static void patch_instruction(VAPICROMState *s, X86CPU *cpu, target_ulong ip)
> switch (opcode[0]) {
> case 0x89: /* mov r32 to r/m32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x50 + modrm_reg(opcode[1])); /* push reg */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->set_tpr);
> break;
> case 0x8b: /* mov r/m32 to r32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x90);
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr[modrm_reg(opcode[1])]);
> break;
> case 0xa1: /* mov abs to eax */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip, handlers->get_tpr[0]);
> break;
> case 0xa3: /* mov eax to abs */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip, handlers->set_tpr_eax);
> break;
> case 0xc7: /* mov imm32, r/m32 (c7/0) */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x68); /* push imm32 */
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 6, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 0);
> cpu_memory_rw_debug(cs, ip + 1, (void *)&imm32, sizeof(imm32), 1);
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 5, handlers->set_tpr);
> break;
> case 0xff: /* push r/m32 */
> patch_byte(cpu, ip, 0x50); /* push eax */
> - patch_call(s, cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> + patch_call(cpu, ip + 1, handlers->get_tpr_stack);
> break;
> default:
> abort();
> }
>
> resume_all_vcpus();
> -
> - if (!kvm_enabled()) {
> - /* Both tb_lock and iothread_mutex will be reset when
> - * longjmps back into the cpu_exec loop. */
> - tb_lock();
> - tb_gen_code(cs, current_pc, current_cs_base, current_flags, 1);
> - cpu_loop_exit_noexc(cs);
> - }
> }
>
> void vapic_report_tpr_access(DeviceState *dev, CPUState *cs, target_ulong ip,
--
Alex Bennée
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-23 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-23 1:20 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mttcg/i386: Patch instruction using async_safe_* framework Pranith Kumar
2017-02-23 10:50 ` Alex Bennée [this message]
2017-02-23 22:38 ` Richard Henderson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-28 5:28 Pranith Kumar
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=87vas1uqom.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/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).