From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
osstest service owner <osstest-admin@xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 94442: regressions - FAIL
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 14:08:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <573B17B7.5090606@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <573B152C02000078000EC11D@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 17/05/16 11:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 16.05.16 at 11:24, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 02:57:13AM +0000, osstest service owner wrote:
>>> flight 94442 xen-unstable real [real]
>>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/94442/
>> [...]
>>> test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-intel 9 redhat-install fail REGR. vs. 94368
>> The changes in this flight shouldn't cause failure like this. See below.
>>
>> It is more likely to be caused by SMEP/SMAP fix, which are now in
>> master. It seems that previous run didn't discover this.
>>
>> Log file at:
>>
>> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/94442/test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel
>> 6hvm-intel/serial-italia0.log
>>
>> May 15 22:07:44.023500 (XEN) Xen BUG at entry.S:221
>> May 15 22:07:47.455549 (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.7.0-rc x86_64 debug=y Not tainted ]----
>> May 15 22:07:47.463500 (XEN) CPU: 0
>> May 15 22:07:47.463531 (XEN) RIP: e008:[<ffff82d0802411c7>] cr4_pv32_restore+0x37/0x40
>> May 15 22:07:47.463567 (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010287 CONTEXT: hypervisor (d0v3)
>> May 15 22:07:47.471503 (XEN) rax: 0000000000000000 rbx: 00000000cf195e50 rcx: 0000000000000001
>> May 15 22:07:47.479496 (XEN) rdx: ffff8300be907ff8 rsi: 0000000000007ff0 rdi: 000000000022287e
>> May 15 22:07:47.487498 (XEN) rbp: 00007cff416f80c7 rsp: ffff8300be907f08 r8: ffff83023df8a000
>> May 15 22:07:47.495498 (XEN) r9: ffff83023df8a000 r10: 00000000deadbeef r11: 0000000000800000
>> May 15 22:07:47.503510 (XEN) r12: ffff8300bed32000 r13: ffff83023df8a000 r14: 0000000000000000
>> May 15 22:07:47.503549 (XEN) r15: ffff83023df72000 cr0: 0000000080050033 cr4: 00000000001526e0
>> May 15 22:07:47.511501 (XEN) cr3: 00000002383d7000 cr2: 00000000b71ff000
>> May 15 22:07:47.519493 (XEN) ds: 007b es: 007b fs: 00d8 gs: 0033 ss: 0000 cs: e008
>> May 15 22:07:47.527520 (XEN) Xen code around <ffff82d0802411c7> (cr4_pv32_restore+0x37/0x40):
>> May 15 22:07:47.535491 (XEN) 3b 05 03 87 0a 00 74 02 <0f> 0b 5a 31 c0 c3 0f 1f 00 f6 42 04 01 0f 84 26
>> May 15 22:07:47.535531 (XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff8300be907f08:
>> May 15 22:07:47.543502 (XEN) 0000000000000000 ffff82d080240f22 ffff83023df72000 0000000000000000
>> May 15 22:07:47.551559 (XEN) ffff83023df8a000 ffff8300bed32000 00000000cf195e6c 00000000cf195e50
>> May 15 22:07:47.559494 (XEN) 0000000000800000 00000000deadbeef ffff83023df8a000 0000000000000206
>> May 15 22:07:47.567496 (XEN) 0000000000000001 0000000000000001 0000000000000000 0000000000007ff0
>> May 15 22:07:47.575503 (XEN) 000000000022287e 0000010000000000 00000000c1001027 0000000000000061
>> May 15 22:07:47.575543 (XEN) 0000000000000246 00000000cf195e44 0000000000000069 000000000000beef
>> May 15 22:07:47.583508 (XEN) 000000000000beef 000000000000beef 000000000000beef 0000000000000000
>> May 15 22:07:47.591503 (XEN) ffff8300bed30000 0000000000000000 00000000001526e0
>> May 15 22:07:47.599493 (XEN) Xen call trace:
>> May 15 22:07:47.599522 (XEN) [<ffff82d0802411c7>] cr4_pv32_restore+0x37/0x40
> I think I see the problem the introduction of caching in v3 introduced:
> In compat_restore_all_guest we have (getting patched in by altinsn
> patching):
>
> .Lcr4_alt:
> testb $3,UREGS_cs(%rsp)
> jpe .Lcr4_alt_end
> mov CPUINFO_cr4-CPUINFO_guest_cpu_user_regs(%rsp), %rax
> and $~XEN_CR4_PV32_BITS, %rax
> mov %rax, CPUINFO_cr4-CPUINFO_guest_cpu_user_regs(%rsp)
> mov %rax, %cr4
> .Lcr4_alt_end:
>
> If an NMI occurs between the updating og the cached value and the
> actual CR4 write, the NMI handling will cause the cached value to get
> SMEP+SMAP enabled again (in both cache and CR4), and once we
> get back here, we will clear it in just CR4.
>
> We don't want to undo the caching, as that gave us performance back
> at least for 64-bit PV guests.
>
> We also can't simply swap the two instructions: If we did, an NMI
> between the two would itself trigger the BUG in cr4_pv32_restore
> (as the check there assumes that CR4 always has no less of the
> bits of interest set than the cached value).
>
> The options I see are:
>
> 1) Ditch the debug check altogether, for being false positive in
> exactly one corner case.
>
> 2) Make the NMI handler recognize the single critical pair of
> instructions.
>
> 3) Change the code sequence above to
>
> .Lcr4_alt:
> testb $3,UREGS_cs(%rsp)
> jpe .Lcr4_alt_end
> mov CPUINFO_cr4-CPUINFO_guest_cpu_user_regs(%rsp), %rax
> and $~XEN_CR4_PV32_BITS, %rax
> 1:
> mov %rax, CPUINFO_cr4-CPUINFO_guest_cpu_user_regs(%rsp)
> mov %rax, %cr4
> /* (suitable comment goes here) */
> cmp %rax, CPUINFO_cr4-CPUINFO_guest_cpu_user_regs(%rsp)
> jne 1b
> .Lcr4_alt_end:
>
> (assuming that an insane flood of NMIs not allowing this loop to
> be exited would be sufficiently problematic in other ways).
>
> I dislike 1, and between 2 and 3 I think I'd prefer the latter, unless
> someone else sees something wrong with such an approach.
+1 for option 3. If we have a flood of NMIs, we have larger problems
than this loop.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-17 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-16 2:57 [xen-unstable test] 94442: regressions - FAIL osstest service owner
2016-05-16 9:24 ` Wei Liu
2016-05-16 9:29 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-05-16 9:39 ` Wei Liu
2016-05-16 9:42 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-05-17 8:59 ` Jan Beulich
2016-05-17 9:01 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-05-17 9:08 ` Jan Beulich
2016-05-17 9:06 ` Jan Beulich
2016-05-17 10:57 ` Jan Beulich
2016-05-17 13:08 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
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=573B17B7.5090606@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=osstest-admin@xenproject.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).