All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: "Russell King, ARM Linux" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, gor <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-csky <linux-csky@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mips <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kselftest <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Foley <pefoley@google.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: selftests: Add a test for KVM_RUN+rseq to detect task migration bugs
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:20:17 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <282257549.21721.1629732017655.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <766990430.21713.1629731934069.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>

[ re-send to Darren Hart ]

----- On Aug 23, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote:

> ----- On Aug 20, 2021, at 6:50 PM, Sean Christopherson seanjc@google.com wrote:
> 
>> Add a test to verify an rseq's CPU ID is updated correctly if the task is
>> migrated while the kernel is handling KVM_RUN.  This is a regression test
>> for a bug introduced by commit 72c3c0fe54a3 ("x86/kvm: Use generic xfer
>> to guest work function"), where TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME would be cleared by KVM
>> without updating rseq, leading to a stale CPU ID and other badness.
>> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> +#define RSEQ_SIG 0xdeadbeef
> 
> Is there any reason for defining a custom signature rather than including
> tools/testing/selftests/rseq/rseq.h ? This should take care of including
> the proper architecture header which will define the appropriate signature.
> 
> Arguably you don't define rseq critical sections in this test per se, but
> I'm wondering why the custom signature here.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +
>> +static void *migration_worker(void *ign)
>> +{
>> +	cpu_set_t allowed_mask;
>> +	int r, i, nr_cpus, cpu;
>> +
>> +	CPU_ZERO(&allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +	nr_cpus = CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask);
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < 20000; i++) {
>> +		cpu = i % nr_cpus;
>> +		if (!CPU_ISSET(cpu, &possible_mask))
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		CPU_SET(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Bump the sequence count twice to allow the reader to detect
>> +		 * that a migration may have occurred in between rseq and sched
>> +		 * CPU ID reads.  An odd sequence count indicates a migration
>> +		 * is in-progress, while a completely different count indicates
>> +		 * a migration occurred since the count was last read.
>> +		 */
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
> 
> So technically this atomic_inc contains the required barriers because the
> selftests
> implementation uses "__sync_add_and_fetch(&addr->val, 1)". But it's rather odd
> that
> the semantic differs from the kernel implementation in terms of memory barriers:
> the
> kernel implementation of atomic_inc guarantees no memory barriers, but this one
> happens to provide full barriers pretty much by accident (selftests
> futex/include/atomic.h documents no such guarantee).
> 
> If this full barrier guarantee is indeed provided by the selftests atomic.h
> header,
> I would really like a comment stating that in the atomic.h header so the carpet
> is
> not pulled from under our feet by a future optimization.
> 
> 
>> +		r = sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(allowed_mask), &allowed_mask);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_setaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)",
>> +			    errno, strerror(errno));
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
>> +
>> +		CPU_CLR(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Let the read-side get back into KVM_RUN to improve the odds
>> +		 * of task migration coinciding with KVM's run loop.
> 
> This comment should be about increasing the odds of letting the seqlock
> read-side
> complete. Otherwise, the delay between the two back-to-back atomic_inc is so
> small
> that the seqlock read-side may never have time to complete the reading the rseq
> cpu id and the sched_getcpu() call, and can retry forever.
> 
> I'm wondering if 1 microsecond is sufficient on other architectures as well. One
> alternative way to make this depend less on the architecture's implementation of
> sched_getcpu (whether it's a vDSO, or goes through a syscall) would be to read
> the rseq cpu id and call sched_getcpu a few times (e.g. 3 times) in the
> migration
> thread rather than use usleep, and throw away the value read. This would ensure
> the delay is appropriate on all architectures.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Mathieu
> 
>> +		 */
>> +		usleep(1);
>> +	}
>> +	done = true;
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_vm *vm;
>> +	u32 cpu, rseq_cpu;
>> +	int r, snapshot;
>> +
>> +	/* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */
>> +	setbuf(stdout, NULL);
>> +
>> +	r = sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(possible_mask), &possible_mask);
>> +	TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_getaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)", errno,
>> +		    strerror(errno));
>> +
>> +	if (CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask) < 2) {
>> +		print_skip("Only one CPU, task migration not possible\n");
>> +		exit(KSFT_SKIP);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(0);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Create and run a dummy VM that immediately exits to userspace via
>> +	 * GUEST_SYNC, while concurrently migrating the process by setting its
>> +	 * CPU affinity.
>> +	 */
>> +	vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, 0, guest_code);
>> +
>> +	pthread_create(&migration_thread, NULL, migration_worker, 0);
>> +
>> +	while (!done) {
>> +		vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(get_ucall(vm, VCPU_ID, NULL) == UCALL_SYNC,
>> +			    "Guest failed?");
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Verify rseq's CPU matches sched's CPU.  Ensure migration
>> +		 * doesn't occur between sched_getcpu() and reading the rseq
>> +		 * cpu_id by rereading both if the sequence count changes, or
>> +		 * if the count is odd (migration in-progress).
>> +		 */
>> +		do {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Drop bit 0 to force a mismatch if the count is odd,
>> +			 * i.e. if a migration is in-progress.
>> +			 */
>> +			snapshot = atomic_read(&seq_cnt) & ~1;
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +			cpu = sched_getcpu();
>> +			rseq_cpu = READ_ONCE(__rseq.cpu_id);
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +		} while (snapshot != atomic_read(&seq_cnt));
>> +
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(rseq_cpu == cpu,
>> +			    "rseq CPU = %d, sched CPU = %d\n", rseq_cpu, cpu);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	pthread_join(migration_thread, NULL);
>> +
>> +	kvm_vm_free(vm);
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(RSEQ_FLAG_UNREGISTER);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.33.0.rc2.250.ged5fa647cd-goog
> 
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
	linux-kselftest <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>, shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>, gor <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Russell King, ARM Linux" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	linux-csky <linux-csky@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-mips <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Foley <pefoley@google.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: selftests: Add a test for KVM_RUN+rseq to detect task migration bugs
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:20:17 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <282257549.21721.1629732017655.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <766990430.21713.1629731934069.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>

[ re-send to Darren Hart ]

----- On Aug 23, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote:

> ----- On Aug 20, 2021, at 6:50 PM, Sean Christopherson seanjc@google.com wrote:
> 
>> Add a test to verify an rseq's CPU ID is updated correctly if the task is
>> migrated while the kernel is handling KVM_RUN.  This is a regression test
>> for a bug introduced by commit 72c3c0fe54a3 ("x86/kvm: Use generic xfer
>> to guest work function"), where TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME would be cleared by KVM
>> without updating rseq, leading to a stale CPU ID and other badness.
>> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> +#define RSEQ_SIG 0xdeadbeef
> 
> Is there any reason for defining a custom signature rather than including
> tools/testing/selftests/rseq/rseq.h ? This should take care of including
> the proper architecture header which will define the appropriate signature.
> 
> Arguably you don't define rseq critical sections in this test per se, but
> I'm wondering why the custom signature here.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +
>> +static void *migration_worker(void *ign)
>> +{
>> +	cpu_set_t allowed_mask;
>> +	int r, i, nr_cpus, cpu;
>> +
>> +	CPU_ZERO(&allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +	nr_cpus = CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask);
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < 20000; i++) {
>> +		cpu = i % nr_cpus;
>> +		if (!CPU_ISSET(cpu, &possible_mask))
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		CPU_SET(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Bump the sequence count twice to allow the reader to detect
>> +		 * that a migration may have occurred in between rseq and sched
>> +		 * CPU ID reads.  An odd sequence count indicates a migration
>> +		 * is in-progress, while a completely different count indicates
>> +		 * a migration occurred since the count was last read.
>> +		 */
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
> 
> So technically this atomic_inc contains the required barriers because the
> selftests
> implementation uses "__sync_add_and_fetch(&addr->val, 1)". But it's rather odd
> that
> the semantic differs from the kernel implementation in terms of memory barriers:
> the
> kernel implementation of atomic_inc guarantees no memory barriers, but this one
> happens to provide full barriers pretty much by accident (selftests
> futex/include/atomic.h documents no such guarantee).
> 
> If this full barrier guarantee is indeed provided by the selftests atomic.h
> header,
> I would really like a comment stating that in the atomic.h header so the carpet
> is
> not pulled from under our feet by a future optimization.
> 
> 
>> +		r = sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(allowed_mask), &allowed_mask);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_setaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)",
>> +			    errno, strerror(errno));
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
>> +
>> +		CPU_CLR(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Let the read-side get back into KVM_RUN to improve the odds
>> +		 * of task migration coinciding with KVM's run loop.
> 
> This comment should be about increasing the odds of letting the seqlock
> read-side
> complete. Otherwise, the delay between the two back-to-back atomic_inc is so
> small
> that the seqlock read-side may never have time to complete the reading the rseq
> cpu id and the sched_getcpu() call, and can retry forever.
> 
> I'm wondering if 1 microsecond is sufficient on other architectures as well. One
> alternative way to make this depend less on the architecture's implementation of
> sched_getcpu (whether it's a vDSO, or goes through a syscall) would be to read
> the rseq cpu id and call sched_getcpu a few times (e.g. 3 times) in the
> migration
> thread rather than use usleep, and throw away the value read. This would ensure
> the delay is appropriate on all architectures.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Mathieu
> 
>> +		 */
>> +		usleep(1);
>> +	}
>> +	done = true;
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_vm *vm;
>> +	u32 cpu, rseq_cpu;
>> +	int r, snapshot;
>> +
>> +	/* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */
>> +	setbuf(stdout, NULL);
>> +
>> +	r = sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(possible_mask), &possible_mask);
>> +	TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_getaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)", errno,
>> +		    strerror(errno));
>> +
>> +	if (CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask) < 2) {
>> +		print_skip("Only one CPU, task migration not possible\n");
>> +		exit(KSFT_SKIP);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(0);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Create and run a dummy VM that immediately exits to userspace via
>> +	 * GUEST_SYNC, while concurrently migrating the process by setting its
>> +	 * CPU affinity.
>> +	 */
>> +	vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, 0, guest_code);
>> +
>> +	pthread_create(&migration_thread, NULL, migration_worker, 0);
>> +
>> +	while (!done) {
>> +		vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(get_ucall(vm, VCPU_ID, NULL) == UCALL_SYNC,
>> +			    "Guest failed?");
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Verify rseq's CPU matches sched's CPU.  Ensure migration
>> +		 * doesn't occur between sched_getcpu() and reading the rseq
>> +		 * cpu_id by rereading both if the sequence count changes, or
>> +		 * if the count is odd (migration in-progress).
>> +		 */
>> +		do {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Drop bit 0 to force a mismatch if the count is odd,
>> +			 * i.e. if a migration is in-progress.
>> +			 */
>> +			snapshot = atomic_read(&seq_cnt) & ~1;
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +			cpu = sched_getcpu();
>> +			rseq_cpu = READ_ONCE(__rseq.cpu_id);
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +		} while (snapshot != atomic_read(&seq_cnt));
>> +
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(rseq_cpu == cpu,
>> +			    "rseq CPU = %d, sched CPU = %d\n", rseq_cpu, cpu);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	pthread_join(migration_thread, NULL);
>> +
>> +	kvm_vm_free(vm);
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(RSEQ_FLAG_UNREGISTER);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.33.0.rc2.250.ged5fa647cd-goog
> 
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: "Russell King, ARM Linux" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	 Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
	 Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
	 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	 Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, gor <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	 Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	 rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	 Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	 Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
	 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	 linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 linux-csky <linux-csky@vger.kernel.org>,
	 linux-mips <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	 linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	 linux-kselftest <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Peter Foley <pefoley@google.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	 Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: selftests: Add a test for KVM_RUN+rseq to detect task migration bugs
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:20:17 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <282257549.21721.1629732017655.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <766990430.21713.1629731934069.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>

[ re-send to Darren Hart ]

----- On Aug 23, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote:

> ----- On Aug 20, 2021, at 6:50 PM, Sean Christopherson seanjc@google.com wrote:
> 
>> Add a test to verify an rseq's CPU ID is updated correctly if the task is
>> migrated while the kernel is handling KVM_RUN.  This is a regression test
>> for a bug introduced by commit 72c3c0fe54a3 ("x86/kvm: Use generic xfer
>> to guest work function"), where TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME would be cleared by KVM
>> without updating rseq, leading to a stale CPU ID and other badness.
>> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> +#define RSEQ_SIG 0xdeadbeef
> 
> Is there any reason for defining a custom signature rather than including
> tools/testing/selftests/rseq/rseq.h ? This should take care of including
> the proper architecture header which will define the appropriate signature.
> 
> Arguably you don't define rseq critical sections in this test per se, but
> I'm wondering why the custom signature here.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +
>> +static void *migration_worker(void *ign)
>> +{
>> +	cpu_set_t allowed_mask;
>> +	int r, i, nr_cpus, cpu;
>> +
>> +	CPU_ZERO(&allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +	nr_cpus = CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask);
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < 20000; i++) {
>> +		cpu = i % nr_cpus;
>> +		if (!CPU_ISSET(cpu, &possible_mask))
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		CPU_SET(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Bump the sequence count twice to allow the reader to detect
>> +		 * that a migration may have occurred in between rseq and sched
>> +		 * CPU ID reads.  An odd sequence count indicates a migration
>> +		 * is in-progress, while a completely different count indicates
>> +		 * a migration occurred since the count was last read.
>> +		 */
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
> 
> So technically this atomic_inc contains the required barriers because the
> selftests
> implementation uses "__sync_add_and_fetch(&addr->val, 1)". But it's rather odd
> that
> the semantic differs from the kernel implementation in terms of memory barriers:
> the
> kernel implementation of atomic_inc guarantees no memory barriers, but this one
> happens to provide full barriers pretty much by accident (selftests
> futex/include/atomic.h documents no such guarantee).
> 
> If this full barrier guarantee is indeed provided by the selftests atomic.h
> header,
> I would really like a comment stating that in the atomic.h header so the carpet
> is
> not pulled from under our feet by a future optimization.
> 
> 
>> +		r = sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(allowed_mask), &allowed_mask);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_setaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)",
>> +			    errno, strerror(errno));
>> +		atomic_inc(&seq_cnt);
>> +
>> +		CPU_CLR(cpu, &allowed_mask);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Let the read-side get back into KVM_RUN to improve the odds
>> +		 * of task migration coinciding with KVM's run loop.
> 
> This comment should be about increasing the odds of letting the seqlock
> read-side
> complete. Otherwise, the delay between the two back-to-back atomic_inc is so
> small
> that the seqlock read-side may never have time to complete the reading the rseq
> cpu id and the sched_getcpu() call, and can retry forever.
> 
> I'm wondering if 1 microsecond is sufficient on other architectures as well. One
> alternative way to make this depend less on the architecture's implementation of
> sched_getcpu (whether it's a vDSO, or goes through a syscall) would be to read
> the rseq cpu id and call sched_getcpu a few times (e.g. 3 times) in the
> migration
> thread rather than use usleep, and throw away the value read. This would ensure
> the delay is appropriate on all architectures.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Mathieu
> 
>> +		 */
>> +		usleep(1);
>> +	}
>> +	done = true;
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_vm *vm;
>> +	u32 cpu, rseq_cpu;
>> +	int r, snapshot;
>> +
>> +	/* Tell stdout not to buffer its content */
>> +	setbuf(stdout, NULL);
>> +
>> +	r = sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(possible_mask), &possible_mask);
>> +	TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_getaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)", errno,
>> +		    strerror(errno));
>> +
>> +	if (CPU_COUNT(&possible_mask) < 2) {
>> +		print_skip("Only one CPU, task migration not possible\n");
>> +		exit(KSFT_SKIP);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(0);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Create and run a dummy VM that immediately exits to userspace via
>> +	 * GUEST_SYNC, while concurrently migrating the process by setting its
>> +	 * CPU affinity.
>> +	 */
>> +	vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, 0, guest_code);
>> +
>> +	pthread_create(&migration_thread, NULL, migration_worker, 0);
>> +
>> +	while (!done) {
>> +		vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID);
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(get_ucall(vm, VCPU_ID, NULL) == UCALL_SYNC,
>> +			    "Guest failed?");
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Verify rseq's CPU matches sched's CPU.  Ensure migration
>> +		 * doesn't occur between sched_getcpu() and reading the rseq
>> +		 * cpu_id by rereading both if the sequence count changes, or
>> +		 * if the count is odd (migration in-progress).
>> +		 */
>> +		do {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Drop bit 0 to force a mismatch if the count is odd,
>> +			 * i.e. if a migration is in-progress.
>> +			 */
>> +			snapshot = atomic_read(&seq_cnt) & ~1;
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +			cpu = sched_getcpu();
>> +			rseq_cpu = READ_ONCE(__rseq.cpu_id);
>> +			smp_rmb();
>> +		} while (snapshot != atomic_read(&seq_cnt));
>> +
>> +		TEST_ASSERT(rseq_cpu == cpu,
>> +			    "rseq CPU = %d, sched CPU = %d\n", rseq_cpu, cpu);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	pthread_join(migration_thread, NULL);
>> +
>> +	kvm_vm_free(vm);
>> +
>> +	sys_rseq(RSEQ_FLAG_UNREGISTER);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.33.0.rc2.250.ged5fa647cd-goog
> 
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-23 15:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-20 22:49 [PATCH v2 0/5] KVM: rseq: Fix and a test for a KVM+rseq bug Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] KVM: rseq: Update rseq when processing NOTIFY_RESUME on xfer to KVM guest Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-23 15:00   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:00     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:00     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-20 22:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] entry: rseq: Call rseq_handle_notify_resume() in tracehook_notify_resume() Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:49   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] tools: Move x86 syscall number fallbacks to .../uapi/ Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: selftests: Add a test for KVM_RUN+rseq to detect task migration bugs Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-23 15:18   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:18     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:18     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:20     ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2021-08-23 15:20       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-23 15:20       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-26  0:51       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-26  0:51         ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-26  0:51         ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-26 18:42         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-26 18:42           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-26 18:42           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-26 23:54           ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-26 23:54             ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-26 23:54             ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-27 19:09             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-27 19:09               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-27 19:09               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-27 23:23               ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-27 23:23                 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-27 23:23                 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-28  0:06                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-28  0:06                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-28  0:06                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-08-20 22:50 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: selftests: Remove __NR_userfaultfd syscall fallback Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-23 23:46   ` Ben Gardon
2021-08-23 23:46     ` Ben Gardon
2021-08-23 23:46     ` Ben Gardon

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=282257549.21721.1629732017655.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bgardon@google.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=pefoley@google.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.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.