From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
To: Lijun Pan <ljp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/xive: Implement get_irqchip_state method for XIVE to fix shutdown race
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 14:56:39 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190813045639.lm443zsouievhtne@oak.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E547965E-CC31-470F-8849-0F2A899A121F@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:52:11PM -0500, Lijun Pan wrote:
>
>
> > On Aug 12, 2019, at 12:07 AM, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org> wrote:
[snip]
> > +static void cleanup_single_escalation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > + struct kvmppc_xive_vcpu *xc, int irq)
> > +{
> > + struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
> > + struct xive_irq_data *xd = irq_data_get_irq_handler_data(d);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * This slightly odd sequence gives the right result
> > + * (i.e. stale_p set if xive_esc_on is false) even if
> > + * we race with xive_esc_irq() and xive_irq_eoi().
> > + */
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> I don’t quite understand the logic here.
> Are you saying the code sequence is
> vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on = false; (xive_esc_irq)
> then
> xd->stale_p = true; (cleanup_single_escaltion)
>
> > + xd->stale_p = false;
> > + smp_mb(); /* paired with smb_wmb in xive_esc_irq */
> > + if (!vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on)
> > + xd->stale_p = true;
The natural sequence would be just
xd->stale_p = !vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on;
However, imagine that vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on is true, and the
escalation interrupt gets handled on another CPU between the load of
vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on and the store to xd->stale_p. The interrupt
code calls xive_esc_irq(), which clears vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on, and
then xive_irq_eoi(), which sets xd->stale_p. The natural sequence
could read vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on before the interrupt and see 1, then
write 0 to xd->stale_p after xive_irq_eoi() has set it. That would
mean the final value of xd->stale_p was 0, which is wrong, since in
fact the queue entry has been removed.
With the code I wrote, because the clearing of xd->stale_p comes
before the load from vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on (with a barrier to make
sure they don't get reordered), then if a racing escalation interrupt
on another CPU stores 1 to xd->stale_p before we clear it, then we
must see vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on as 0, and we will set xd->stale_p
again, giving the correct final state (xd->stale_p == 1). If the
racing interrupt clears vcpu->arch.xive_esc_on after we load it and
see 1, then its store to set xd->stale_p must come after our store to
clear it because of the barrier that I added to xive_esc_irq, so the
final result is once again correct.
[snip]
> > @@ -397,11 +411,16 @@ static void xive_do_source_set_mask(struct xive_irq_data *xd,
> > */
> > if (mask) {
> > val = xive_esb_read(xd, XIVE_ESB_SET_PQ_01);
> > - xd->saved_p = !!(val & XIVE_ESB_VAL_P);
> > - } else if (xd->saved_p)
> > + if (!xd->stale_p && !!(val & XIVE_ESB_VAL_P))
> > + xd->saved_p = true;
> > + xd->stale_p = false;
> > + } else if (xd->saved_p) {
> > xive_esb_read(xd, XIVE_ESB_SET_PQ_10);
> > - else
> > + xd->saved_p = false;
>
> Should we also explicitly set xd->stale_p = true; here?
We don't need to because xd->saved_p and xd->stale_p can never be both
set, and we just saw that xd->saved_p was set.
> > + } else {
> > xive_esb_read(xd, XIVE_ESB_SET_PQ_00);
> > + xd->stale_p = false;
>
> Should we also explicitly set xd->saved_p = true; here?
No, that would be incorrect. This is the case where we are unmasking
the interrupt and there is no queue entry currently. Setting saved_p
would imply that there is a queue entry, which there isn't.
Paul.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-13 4:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-12 5:06 [PATCH 0/2] powerpc/xive: Fix race condition leading to host crashes and hangs Paul Mackerras
2019-08-12 5:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix race in re-enabling XIVE escalation interrupts Paul Mackerras
2019-08-13 4:59 ` Paul Mackerras
2019-08-12 5:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/xive: Implement get_irqchip_state method for XIVE to fix shutdown race Paul Mackerras
2019-08-13 3:52 ` Lijun Pan
2019-08-13 4:56 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
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=20190813045639.lm443zsouievhtne@oak.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=ljp@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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).