From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
Cc: "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, "Ashok Raj" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
"Wei Liu" <wl@xen.org>, "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 11/15] microcode: unify loading update during CPU resuming and AP wakeup
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:26:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <084cb377-aca9-3c16-ee99-698284fda6aa@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190829073747.GB12650@gao-cwp>
On 29.08.2019 09:37, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:09:07AM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:44:34AM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 04:10:46PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:25:24AM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
>>>>> Both are loading the cached patch. Since APs call the unified function,
>>>>> microcode_update_one(), during wakeup, the 'start_update' parameter
>>>>> which originally used to distinguish BSP and APs is redundant. So remove
>>>>> this parameter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Note that here is a functional change: resuming a CPU would call
>>>>> ->end_update() now while previously it wasn't. Not quite sure
>>>>> whether it is correct.
>>>>
>>>> I guess that's required if it called start_update prior to calling
>>>> end_update?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes in v9:
>>>>> - return -EOPNOTSUPP rather than 0 if microcode_ops is NULL in
>>>>> microcode_update_one()
>>>>> - rebase and fix conflicts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes in v8:
>>>>> - split out from the previous patch
>>>>> ---
>>>>> xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c | 2 +-
>>>>> xen/arch/x86/microcode.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>>>>> xen/arch/x86/smpboot.c | 5 +--
>>>>> xen/include/asm-x86/processor.h | 4 +-
>>>>> 4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
>>>>> index 4f21903..24798d5 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
>>>>> @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ static int enter_state(u32 state)
>>>>>
>>>>> console_end_sync();
>>>>>
>>>>> - microcode_resume_cpu();
>>>>> + microcode_update_one();
>>>>>
>>>>> if ( !recheck_cpu_features(0) )
>>>>> panic("Missing previously available feature(s)\n");
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c b/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
>>>>> index a2febc7..bdd9c9f 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
>>>>> @@ -203,24 +203,6 @@ static struct microcode_patch *parse_blob(const char *buf, uint32_t len)
>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -int microcode_resume_cpu(void)
>>>>> -{
>>>>> - int err;
>>>>> - struct cpu_signature *sig = &this_cpu(cpu_sig);
>>>>> -
>>>>> - if ( !microcode_ops )
>>>>> - return 0;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - spin_lock(µcode_mutex);
>>>>> -
>>>>> - err = microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(sig);
>>>>> - if ( likely(!err) )
>>>>> - err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(microcode_cache);
>>>>> - spin_unlock(µcode_mutex);
>>>>> -
>>>>> - return err;
>>>>> -}
>>>>> -
>>>>> void microcode_free_patch(struct microcode_patch *microcode_patch)
>>>>> {
>>>>> microcode_ops->free_patch(microcode_patch->mc);
>>>>> @@ -384,11 +366,29 @@ static int __init microcode_init(void)
>>>>> }
>>>>> __initcall(microcode_init);
>>>>>
>>>>> -int __init early_microcode_update_cpu(bool start_update)
>>>>> +/* Load a cached update to current cpu */
>>>>> +int microcode_update_one(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int rc;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if ( !microcode_ops )
>>>>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + rc = microcode_update_cpu(NULL);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if ( microcode_ops->end_update )
>>>>> + microcode_ops->end_update();
>>>>
>>>> Don't you need to call start_update before calling
>>>> microcode_update_cpu?
>>>
>>> No. On AMD side, osvw_status records the hardware erratum in the system.
>>> As we don't assume all CPUs have the same erratum, each cpu calls
>>> end_update to update osvw_status after ucode loading.
>>> start_update just resets osvw_status to 0. And it is called once prior
>>> to ucode loading on any CPU so that osvw_status can be recomputed.
>>
>> Oh, I think I understand it. start_update must only be called once
>> _before_ the sequence to update the microcode on all CPUs is
>> performed, while end_update needs to be called on _each_ CPU after the
>> update has been completed in order to account for any erratas.
>>
>> The name for those hooks should be improved, I guess renaming
>> end_update to end_update_each or end_update_percpu would be clearer in
>> order to make it clear that start_update is global, while end_update
>> is percpu. Anyway, I don't want to delay this series for a naming nit.
>>
>> I'm still unsure where start_update is called for the resume from
>> suspension case, I don't seem to see any call to start_update neither
>> in enter_state or microcode_update_one, hence I think this is missing?
>
> No. Actually, no call of start_update for resume case.
>
>>
>> I would expect you need to clean osvw_status also on resume from
>> suspension, in case microcode loading fails? Or else you will be
>> carrying a stale osvw_status.
>
> Then we need to send IPI to all other CPUs to recompute osvw_state. But
> I think it is not necessary. If ucode cache isn't changed during the
> CPU's suspension period, there is not stale osvw bit (assuming OSVW on
> the resuming CPU won't change). If the ucode cache is updated (there
> must be a late ucode loading), osvw_status should have been cleaned
> before late ucode loading.
I'd actually expect firmware to load whatever ucode it has available,
in which case the OSVW state can very well change across resume. I
agree though that after a successful load of the ucode Xen has
cached that state should be the pre-suspend one again. Yet I guess it
would be more consistent if a proper start-update, ucode-load, end-
update cycle was done even in this case.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-29 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-19 1:25 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 00/15] improve late microcode loading Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 01/15] microcode/intel: extend microcode_update_match() Chao Gao
2019-08-28 15:12 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 7:15 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 7:14 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 02/15] microcode/amd: fix memory leak Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 03/15] microcode/amd: distinguish old and mismatched ucode in microcode_fits() Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 04/15] microcode: introduce a global cache of ucode patch Chao Gao
2019-08-22 11:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-28 15:21 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 10:18 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 05/15] microcode: clean up microcode_resume_cpu Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 06/15] microcode: remove struct ucode_cpu_info Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 07/15] microcode: remove pointless 'cpu' parameter Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 08/15] microcode/amd: call svm_host_osvw_init() in common code Chao Gao
2019-08-22 13:08 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-28 15:26 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 09/15] microcode: pass a patch pointer to apply_microcode() Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 10/15] microcode: split out apply_microcode() from cpu_request_microcode() Chao Gao
2019-08-22 13:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 10:06 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 3:22 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-30 7:25 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 10:19 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 11/15] microcode: unify loading update during CPU resuming and AP wakeup Chao Gao
2019-08-22 14:10 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-22 16:44 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-23 9:09 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 7:37 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 8:16 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 10:26 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2019-08-29 10:29 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 12/15] microcode: reduce memory allocation and copy when creating a patch Chao Gao
2019-08-23 8:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-26 7:03 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-26 8:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 10:47 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 13/15] x86/microcode: Synchronize late microcode loading Chao Gao
2019-08-19 10:27 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-19 14:49 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 12:06 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 3:30 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 14/15] microcode: remove microcode_update_lock Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 15/15] microcode: block #NMI handling when loading an ucode Chao Gao
2019-08-23 8:46 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-26 8:07 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-27 4:52 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-28 8:52 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-29 12:11 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 6:35 ` Chao Gao
2019-09-09 5:52 ` Chao Gao
2019-09-09 6:16 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 12:22 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 6:33 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-30 7:30 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-22 7:51 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 00/15] improve late microcode loading Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-22 15:39 ` Chao Gao
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=084cb377-aca9-3c16-ee99-698284fda6aa@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--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).