All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	 Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	 Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	 Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] Avoid rcu_core() if CPU just left guest vcpu
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 11:05:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zjptg53OzzKwImH5@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZjkludR5wh0mKZ2H@tpad>

On Mon, May 06, 2024, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 05:44:22PM -0300, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > > And that race exists in general, i.e. any IRQ that arrives just as the idle task
> > > is being scheduled in will unnecessarily wakeup rcuc.
> > 
> > That's a race could be solved with the timeout (snapshot) solution, if we 
> > don't zero last_guest_exit on kvm_sched_out(), right?
> 
> Yes.

And if KVM doesn't zero last_guest_exit on kvm_sched_out(), then we're right back
in the situation where RCU can get false positives (see below).

> > > > > >         /* Is the RCU core waiting for a quiescent state from this CPU? */
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The problem is:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 1) You should only set that flag, in the VM-entry path, after the point
> > > > > > where no use of RCU is made: close to guest_state_enter_irqoff call.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why?  As established above, KVM essentially has 1 second to enter the guest after
> > > > > setting in_guest_run_loop (or whatever we call it).  In the vast majority of cases,
> > > > > the time before KVM enters the guest can probably be measured in microseconds.
> > > > 
> > > > OK.
> > > > 
> > > > > Snapshotting the exit time has the exact same problem of depending on KVM to
> > > > > re-enter the guest soon-ish, so I don't understand why this would be considered
> > > > > a problem with a flag to note the CPU is in KVM's run loop, but not with a
> > > > > snapshot to say the CPU recently exited a KVM guest.
> > > > 
> > > > See the race above.
> > > 
> > > Ya, but if kvm_last_guest_exit is zeroed in kvm_sched_out(), then the snapshot
> > > approach ends up with the same race.  And not zeroing kvm_last_guest_exit is
> > > arguably much more problematic as encountering a false positive doesn't require
> > > hitting a small window.
> > 
> > For the false positive (only on nohz_full) the maximum delay for the
> > rcu_core() to be run would be 1s, and that would be in case we don't
> > schedule out for some userspace task or idle thread, in which case we have
> > a quiescent state without the need of rcu_core().
> > 
> > Now, for not being an userspace nor idle thread, it would need to be one or
> > more kernel threads, which I suppose aren't usually many, nor usually take
> > that long for completing, if we consider to be running on an isolated
> > (nohz_full) cpu. 
> > 
> > So, for the kvm_sched_out() case, I don't actually think we are  
> > statistically introducing that much of a delay in the RCU mechanism.
> > 
> > (I may be missing some point, though)

My point is that if kvm_last_guest_exit is left as-is on kvm_sched_out() and
vcpu_put(), then from a kernel/RCU safety perspective there is no meaningful
difference between KVM setting kvm_last_guest_exit and userspace being allowed
to mark a task as being exempt from being preempted by rcuc.  Userspace can
simply do KVM_RUN once to gain exemption from rcuc until the 1 second timeout
expires.

And if KVM does zero kvm_last_guest_exit on kvm_sched_out()/vcpu_put(), then the
approach has the exact same window as my in_guest_run_loop idea, i.e. rcuc can be
unnecessarily awakened in the time between KVM puts the vCPU and the CPU exits to
userspace.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-05-07 18:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-28 17:19 [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] Avoid rcu_core() if CPU just left guest vcpu Leonardo Bras
2024-03-28 17:19 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/2] kvm: Implement guest_exit_last_time() Leonardo Bras
2024-03-28 17:19 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] rcu: Ignore RCU in nohz_full cpus if it was running a guest recently Leonardo Bras
2024-04-01 15:52   ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-01 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] Avoid rcu_core() if CPU just left guest vcpu Sean Christopherson
2024-04-05 13:45   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-04-05 14:42     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-06  0:03       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-08 17:16         ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-08 18:42           ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-08 20:06             ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-08 21:02               ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-08 21:56                 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-08 22:35                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-08 23:06                     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-08 23:20                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-10  2:39           ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-04-15 19:47           ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-04-15 21:29             ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-16 12:36               ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-04-16 14:07                 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-17 16:14                   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-04-17 17:22                     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-03 20:44                       ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-06 18:47                         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-05-07 18:05                           ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-05-07 22:36                             ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-03 18:42   ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-03 19:09     ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-03 21:29     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-03 22:00       ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-03 22:00       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-07 17:55         ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-07 19:15           ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-07 21:00             ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-07 21:37               ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-07 23:47                 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-08  0:08                   ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-08  2:51                     ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-08  3:22                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-08  6:19                         ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-08 14:01                           ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-09  3:32                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-09  8:16                               ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-09 10:14                                 ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-09 23:45                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 16:06                                     ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-10 16:21                                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 17:12                                         ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-10 17:41                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-10 19:50                                             ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-10 21:15                                               ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-10 21:38                                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-09 22:41                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-09 23:07                                   ` Leonardo Bras Soares Passos
2024-05-11  2:08                             ` Leonardo Bras
2024-05-08  3:20                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-08  4:04                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-08 14:36                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-05-08 15:35                       ` Sean Christopherson

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=Zjptg53OzzKwImH5@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=leobras@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
    --cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.