On 2017/6/6 18:57, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> In some cases, for example involving hot-unplug of assigned
> devices, pi_post_block can forget to remove the vCPU from the
> blocked_vcpu_list.  When this happens, the next call to
> pi_pre_block corrupts the list.
> 
> Fix this in two ways.  First, check vcpu->pre_pcpu in pi_pre_block
> and WARN instead of adding the element twice in the list.  Second,
> always do the list removal in pi_post_block if vcpu->pre_pcpu is
> set (not -1).
> 
> The new code keeps interrupts disabled for the whole duration of
> pi_pre_block/pi_post_block.  This is not strictly necessary, but
> easier to follow.  For the same reason, PI.ON is checked only
> after the cmpxchg, and to handle it we just call the post-block
> code.  This removes duplication of the list removal code.
> 
> Cc: Longpeng (Mike) <[email protected]>
> Cc: Huangweidong <[email protected]>
> Cc: Gonglei <[email protected]>
> Cc: wangxin <[email protected]>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 62 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> 


[...]


> @@ -11256,14 +11257,10 @@ static void __pi_post_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>       } while (cmpxchg(&pi_desc->control, old.control,
>                       new.control) != old.control);
>  
> -     if(vcpu->pre_pcpu != -1) {
> -             spin_lock_irqsave(
> -                     &per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                     vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> +     if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(vcpu->pre_pcpu == -1)) {
> +             spin_lock(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, vcpu->pre_pcpu));
>               list_del(&vcpu->blocked_vcpu_list);
> -             spin_unlock_irqrestore(
> -                     &per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                     vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> +             spin_unlock(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, vcpu->pre_pcpu));


Hi Paolo,

spin_lock_irqsave() will disable kernel preempt, but spin_lock() won't. is there
some potential problems ?

Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)

>               vcpu->pre_pcpu = -1;
>       }
>  }
> @@ -11283,7 +11280,6 @@ static void __pi_post_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   */
>  static int pi_pre_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -     unsigned long flags;
>       unsigned int dest;
>       struct pi_desc old, new;
>       struct pi_desc *pi_desc = vcpu_to_pi_desc(vcpu);
> @@ -11293,34 +11289,20 @@ static int pi_pre_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>               !kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu))
>               return 0;
>  
> -     vcpu->pre_pcpu = vcpu->cpu;
> -     spin_lock_irqsave(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                       vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> -     list_add_tail(&vcpu->blocked_vcpu_list,
> -                   &per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu,
> -                   vcpu->pre_pcpu));
> -     spin_unlock_irqrestore(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                            vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> +     WARN_ON(irqs_disabled());
> +     local_irq_disable();
> +     if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(vcpu->pre_pcpu != -1)) {
> +             vcpu->pre_pcpu = vcpu->cpu;
> +             spin_lock(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, vcpu->pre_pcpu));
> +             list_add_tail(&vcpu->blocked_vcpu_list,
> +                           &per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu,
> +                                    vcpu->pre_pcpu));
> +             spin_unlock(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, vcpu->pre_pcpu));
> +     }
>  
>       do {
>               old.control = new.control = pi_desc->control;
>  
> -             /*
> -              * We should not block the vCPU if
> -              * an interrupt is posted for it.
> -              */
> -             if (pi_test_on(pi_desc) == 1) {
> -                     spin_lock_irqsave(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                                       vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> -                     list_del(&vcpu->blocked_vcpu_list);
> -                     spin_unlock_irqrestore(
> -                                     &per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock,
> -                                     vcpu->pre_pcpu), flags);
> -                     vcpu->pre_pcpu = -1;
> -
> -                     return 1;
> -             }
> -
>               WARN((pi_desc->sn == 1),
>                    "Warning: SN field of posted-interrupts "
>                    "is set before blocking\n");
> @@ -11345,7 +11327,12 @@ static int pi_pre_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>       } while (cmpxchg(&pi_desc->control, old.control,
>                       new.control) != old.control);
>  
> -     return 0;
> +     /* We should not block the vCPU if an interrupt is posted for it.  */
> +     if (pi_test_on(pi_desc) == 1)
> +             __pi_post_block(vcpu);
> +
> +     local_irq_enable();
> +     return (vcpu->pre_pcpu == -1);
>  }
>  
>  static int vmx_pre_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> @@ -11361,12 +11348,13 @@ static int vmx_pre_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  static void pi_post_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -     if (!kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(vcpu->kvm) ||
> -             !irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP)  ||
> -             !kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu))
> +     if (vcpu->pre_pcpu == -1)
>               return;
>  
> +     WARN_ON(irqs_disabled());
> +     local_irq_disable();
>       __pi_post_block(vcpu);
> +     local_irq_enable();
>  }
>  
>  static void vmx_post_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)


-- 
Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)

Reply via email to