From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/11] x86/vioapic: switch to use the EOI callback mechanism
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 12:52:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2bcbc817-9120-fd1f-27fd-ed440d4a12eb@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YG7F9afvuvtqgSIS@Air-de-Roger>
On 08.04.2021 10:59, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 08:27:10AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 07.04.2021 18:46, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 05:19:06PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 31.03.2021 12:32, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vioapic.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vioapic.c
>>>>> @@ -621,7 +624,43 @@ static int ioapic_load(struct domain *d, hvm_domain_context_t *h)
>>>>> d->arch.hvm.nr_vioapics != 1 )
>>>>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>>
>>>>> - return hvm_load_entry(IOAPIC, h, &s->domU);
>>>>> + rc = hvm_load_entry(IOAPIC, h, &s->domU);
>>>>> + if ( rc )
>>>>> + return rc;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for ( i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->domU.redirtbl); i++ )
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + const union vioapic_redir_entry *ent = &s->domU.redirtbl[i];
>>>>> + unsigned int vector = ent->fields.vector;
>>>>> + unsigned int delivery_mode = ent->fields.delivery_mode;
>>>>> + struct vcpu *v;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * Add a callback for each possible vector injected by a redirection
>>>>> + * entry.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if ( vector < 16 || !ent->fields.remote_irr ||
>>>>> + (delivery_mode != dest_LowestPrio && delivery_mode != dest_Fixed) )
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for_each_vcpu ( d, v )
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + struct vlapic *vlapic = vcpu_vlapic(v);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * NB: if the vlapic registers were restored before the vio-apic
>>>>> + * ones we could test whether the vector is set in the vlapic IRR
>>>>> + * or ISR registers before unconditionally setting the callback.
>>>>> + * This is harmless as eoi_callback is capable of dealing with
>>>>> + * spurious callbacks.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if ( vlapic_match_dest(vlapic, NULL, 0, ent->fields.dest_id,
>>>>> + ent->fields.dest_mode) )
>>>>> + vlapic_set_callback(vlapic, vector, eoi_callback, NULL);
>>>>
>>>> eoi_callback()'s behavior is only one of the aspects to consider here.
>>>> The other is vlapic_set_callback()'s complaining if it finds a
>>>> callback already set. What guarantees that a mistakenly set callback
>>>> here won't get in conflict with some future use of the same vector by
>>>> the guest?
>>>
>>> Such conflict would only manifest as a warning message, but won't
>>> cause any malfunction, as the later callback would override the
>>> current one.
>>>
>>> This model I'm proposing doesn't support lapic vector sharing with
>>> different devices that require EOI callbacks, I think we already
>>> discussed this on a previous series and agreed it was fine.
>>
>> The problem with such false positive warning messages is that
>> they'll cause cautious people to investigate, i.e. spend perhaps
>> a sizable amount of time in understanding what was actually a non-
>> issue. I view this as a problem, even if the code's functioning is
>> fine the way it is. I'm not even sure explicitly mentioning the
>> situation in the comment is going to help, as one may not stumble
>> across that comment while investigating.
>
> What about making the warning message in case of override in
> vlapic_set_callback conditional to there being a vector pending in IRR
> or ISR?
>
> Without having such vector pending the callback is just useless, as
> it's not going to be executed, so overriding it in that situation is
> perfectly fine. That should prevent the restoring here triggering the
> message unless there's indeed a troublesome sharing of a vector.
Ah yes, since the callbacks are self-clearing, this gating looks quite
reasonable to me.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-31 10:32 [PATCH v3 00/11] x86/intr: introduce EOI callbacks and fix vPT Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 01/11] x86/hvm: drop vcpu parameter from vlapic EOI callbacks Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 16:02 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 16:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-04-01 9:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-01 11:06 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 7:41 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-07 8:19 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 02/11] x86/hvm: drop domain parameter from vioapic/vpic " Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 16:04 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-01 9:15 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-01 9:28 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 03/11] x86/vlapic: introduce an EOI callback mechanism Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 11:47 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-03-31 12:50 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-07 14:55 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 16:27 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:20 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 9:12 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 10:49 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 10:56 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 04/11] x86/vmsi: use the newly introduced EOI callbacks Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 14:59 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 05/11] x86/vioapic: switch to use the EOI callback mechanism Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 15:19 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 16:46 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 8:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 10:52 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 06/11] x86/hvm: allowing registering EOI callbacks for GSIs Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-07 15:51 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-07 17:08 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 6:34 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-15 16:04 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-16 7:29 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-19 8:31 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 12:52 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-08 14:31 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 15:06 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:32 ` [PATCH v3 07/11] x86/dpci: move code Roger Pau Monne
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 08/11] x86/dpci: switch to use a GSI EOI callback Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-08 14:49 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 15:23 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 09/11] x86/vpt: switch interrupt injection model Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-14 10:28 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-14 13:37 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-04-14 14:05 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-14 14:20 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 10/11] x86/vpt: remove vPT timers per-vCPU lists Roger Pau Monne
2021-04-14 10:38 ` Jan Beulich
2021-03-31 10:33 ` [PATCH v3 11/11] x86/vpt: introduce a per-vPT lock Roger Pau Monne
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=2bcbc817-9120-fd1f-27fd-ed440d4a12eb@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.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).