From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B327C47080 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 01:28:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 360FA613C5 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 01:28:55 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 360FA613C5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:54738 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loFgk-00045K-Cd for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 21:28:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loFen-00028z-QX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 21:26:53 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:7160) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loFel-0001cI-8K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 21:26:53 -0400 IronPort-SDR: o/QthKxMNvXUp4ZuIoyslZJqqsINiQU2fuBjOzoA4gI3Jrcic8senaITuXOd1fXQ++m1de0O8T uLJ9y+enJwRw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10002"; a="203710332" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,241,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="203710332" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Jun 2021 18:26:46 -0700 IronPort-SDR: wehWSk+nuy0mEWYl9b3SfkNuXo9DPFfOKnTXFBOF5zET+7mp9Y0YpEFcr6JMUnlZh7/ONDaaNe Kptb/hBBj+HQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,241,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="479507043" Received: from cqiang-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.238.0.151]) ([10.238.0.151]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Jun 2021 18:26:45 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] i386: Add ratelimit for bus locks acquired in guest To: Eduardo Habkost References: <20210521043820.29678-1-chenyi.qiang@intel.com> <20210527211904.sjmkely4t4ragxva@habkost.net> <20210601181837.dl5tcyqywtoidu57@habkost.net> <20210601201051.keixbycislhcsgkc@habkost.net> From: Chenyi Qiang Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 09:26:43 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210601201051.keixbycislhcsgkc@habkost.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=134.134.136.65; envelope-from=chenyi.qiang@intel.com; helo=mga03.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -47 X-Spam_score: -4.8 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.613, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Marcelo Tosatti , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Xiaoyao Li Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 6/2/2021 4:10 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 02:18:37PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 01:14:54PM +0800, Chenyi Qiang wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 5/28/2021 5:19 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:38:20PM +0800, Chenyi Qiang wrote: >>>> [...] >>>>> @@ -4222,6 +4247,15 @@ void kvm_arch_pre_run(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> +static void kvm_rate_limit_on_bus_lock(void) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + uint64_t delay_ns = ratelimit_calculate_delay(&bus_lock_ratelimit_ctrl, 1); >>>>> + >>>>> + if (delay_ns) { >>>>> + g_usleep(delay_ns / SCALE_US); >>>>> + } >>>>> +} >>>>> + >>>>> MemTxAttrs kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) >>>>> { >>>>> X86CPU *x86_cpu = X86_CPU(cpu); >>>>> @@ -4237,6 +4271,9 @@ MemTxAttrs kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) >>>>> } else { >>>>> env->eflags &= ~IF_MASK; >>>>> } >>>>> + if (run->flags & KVM_RUN_X86_BUS_LOCK) { >>>> >>>> Does the KVM API guarantee that KVM_RUN_X86_BUS_LOCK will never >>>> be set if KVM_BUS_LOCK_DETECTION_EXIT isn't enabled? (Otherwise >>>> we risk crashing in ratelimit_calculate_delay() above if rate >>>> limiting is disabled). >>>> >>> >>> Yes. KVM_RUN_X86_BUS_LOCK flag is set when bus lock VM exit happens. Bus >>> lock VM exit is disabled by default and can only be enabled through the >>> KVM_BUS_LOCK_DETECTION_EXIT capability. >> >> I'm queueing on x86-next, thanks! > > This breaks the build. Is there a linux-headers update patch I've missed? > Thanks for the queue and sorry for forgetting to submit the linux-headers update patch. > ../target/i386/kvm/kvm.c: In function 'kvm_arch_init': > ../target/i386/kvm/kvm.c:2322:42: error: 'KVM_CAP_X86_BUS_LOCK_EXIT' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS'? > ret = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_X86_BUS_LOCK_EXIT); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS >