KVM Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] KVM: Implement ring-based dirty memory tracking
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:52:59 -0500
Message-ID: <20191210155259.GD3352@xz-x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <affd9d84-1b84-0c25-c431-a075c58c33dc@redhat.com>

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:07:31AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > I'm thinking whether I can start
> > to use this information in the next post on solving an issue I
> > encountered with the waitqueue.
> > 
> > Current waitqueue is still problematic in that it could wait even with
> > the mmu lock held when with vcpu context.
> 
> I think the idea of the soft limit is that the waiting just cannot
> happen.  That is, the number of dirtied pages _outside_ the guest (guest
> accesses are taken care of by PML, and are subtracted from the soft
> limit) cannot exceed hard_limit - (soft_limit + pml_size).

So the question go backs to, whether this is guaranteed somehow?  Or
do you prefer us to keep the warn_on_once until it triggers then we
can analyze (which I doubt..)?

One thing to mention is that for with-vcpu cases, we probably can even
stop KVM_RUN immediately as long as either the per-vm or per-vcpu ring
reaches the softlimit, then for vcpu case it should be easier to
guarantee that.  What I want to know is the rest of cases like ioctls
or even something not from the userspace (which I think I should read
more later..).

If the answer is yes, I'd be more than glad to drop the waitqueue.

> 
> > The issue is KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS needs the mmu lock to manipulate
> > the write bits, while it's the only interface to also wake up the
> > dirty ring sleepers.  They could dead lock like this:
> > 
> >       main thread                            vcpu thread
> >       ===========                            ===========
> >                                              kvm page fault
> >                                                mark_page_dirty_in_slot
> >                                                mmu lock taken
> >                                                mark dirty, ring full
> >                                                queue on waitqueue
> >                                                (with mmu lock)
> >       KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS
> >         take mmu lock               <------------ deadlock here
> >         reset ring gfns
> >         wakeup dirty ring sleepers
> > 
> > And if we see if the mark_page_dirty_in_slot() is not with a vcpu
> > context (e.g. kvm_mmu_page_fault) but with an ioctl context (those
> > cases we'll use per-vm dirty ring) then it's probably fine.
> > 
> > My planned solution:
> > 
> > - When kvm_get_running_vcpu() != NULL, we postpone the waitqueue waits
> >   until we finished handling this page fault, probably in somewhere
> >   around vcpu_enter_guest, so that we can do wait_event() after the
> >   mmu lock released
> 
> I think this can cause a race:
> 
> 	vCPU 1			vCPU 2		host
> 	---------------------------------------------------------------
> 	mark page dirty
> 				write to page
> 						treat page as not dirty
> 	add page to ring
> 
> where vCPU 2 skips the clean-page slow path entirely.

If we're still with the rule in userspace that we first do RESET then
collect and send the pages (just like what we've discussed before),
then IMHO it's fine to have vcpu2 to skip the slow path?  Because
RESET happens at "treat page as not dirty", then if we are sure that
we only collect and send pages after that point, then the latest
"write to page" data from vcpu2 won't be lost even if vcpu2 is not
blocked by vcpu1's ring full?

Maybe we can also consider to let mark_page_dirty_in_slot() return a
value, then the upper layer could have a chance to skip the spte
update if mark_page_dirty_in_slot() fails to mark the dirty bit, so it
can return directly with RET_PF_RETRY.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu


  reply index

Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-29 21:34 [PATCH RFC 00/15] KVM: Dirty ring interface Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 01/15] KVM: Move running VCPU from ARM to common code Peter Xu
2019-12-03 19:01   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-04  9:42     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-09 22:05       ` Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 02/15] KVM: Add kvm/vcpu argument to mark_dirty_page_in_slot Peter Xu
2019-12-02 19:32   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 20:49     ` Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 03/15] KVM: Add build-time error check on kvm_run size Peter Xu
2019-12-02 19:30   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 20:53     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-02 22:19       ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 22:40         ` Peter Xu
2019-12-03  5:50           ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-03 13:41         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-03 17:04           ` Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 04/15] KVM: Implement ring-based dirty memory tracking Peter Xu
2019-12-02 20:10   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 21:16     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-02 21:50       ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 23:09         ` Peter Xu
2019-12-03 13:48         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-03 18:46           ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-04 10:05             ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-07  0:29               ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-09  9:37                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-09 21:54               ` Peter Xu
2019-12-10 10:07                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-10 15:52                   ` Peter Xu [this message]
2019-12-10 17:09                     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-15 17:21                       ` Peter Xu
2019-12-16 10:08                         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-16 18:54                           ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17  9:01                             ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-17 16:24                               ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17 16:28                                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 21:58                                   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-18 22:24                                     ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-18 22:37                                       ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 22:49                                         ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17  2:28                           ` Tian, Kevin
2019-12-17 16:18                             ` Alex Williamson
2019-12-17 16:30                               ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18  0:29                                 ` Tian, Kevin
     [not found]                           ` <AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D19D645E5F@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
2019-12-17  5:17                             ` Tian, Kevin
2019-12-17  5:25                               ` Yan Zhao
2019-12-17 16:24                                 ` Alex Williamson
2019-12-03 19:13   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-04 10:14     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-04 14:33       ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-04 10:38   ` Jason Wang
2019-12-04 11:04     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-04 19:52       ` Peter Xu
2019-12-05  6:51         ` Jason Wang
2019-12-05 12:08           ` Peter Xu
2019-12-05 13:12             ` Jason Wang
2019-12-10 13:25       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-10 13:31         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-10 16:02           ` Peter Xu
2019-12-10 21:53             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-11  9:05               ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-11 13:04                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-11 14:54                   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-10 21:48           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-11 12:53   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-11 14:14     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-11 20:59     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-11 22:57       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-12  0:08         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-12  7:36           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-12  8:12             ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-12 10:38               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-15 17:33           ` Peter Xu
2019-12-16  9:47             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-16 15:07               ` Peter Xu
2019-12-16 15:33                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-12-16 15:47                   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-11 17:24   ` Christophe de Dinechin
2019-12-13 20:23     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-14  7:57       ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-14 16:26         ` Peter Xu
2019-12-16  9:29           ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-16 15:26             ` Peter Xu
2019-12-16 15:31               ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-16 15:43                 ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17 12:16         ` Christophe de Dinechin
2019-12-17 12:19           ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-17 15:38             ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17 16:31               ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-17 16:42                 ` Peter Xu
2019-12-17 16:48                   ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-17 19:41                     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-18  0:33                       ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 16:32                         ` Peter Xu
2019-12-18 16:41                           ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-20 18:19       ` Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 05/15] KVM: Make dirty ring exclusive to dirty bitmap log Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 06/15] KVM: Introduce dirty ring wait queue Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 07/15] KVM: X86: Implement ring-based dirty memory tracking Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 08/15] KVM: selftests: Always clear dirty bitmap after iteration Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:34 ` [PATCH RFC 09/15] KVM: selftests: Sync uapi/linux/kvm.h to tools/ Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 10/15] KVM: selftests: Use a single binary for dirty/clear log test Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 11/15] KVM: selftests: Introduce after_vcpu_run hook for dirty " Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 12/15] KVM: selftests: Add dirty ring buffer test Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 13/15] KVM: selftests: Let dirty_log_test async for dirty ring test Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 14/15] KVM: selftests: Add "-c" parameter to dirty log test Peter Xu
2019-11-29 21:35 ` [PATCH RFC 15/15] KVM: selftests: Test dirty ring waitqueue Peter Xu
2019-11-30  8:29 ` [PATCH RFC 00/15] KVM: Dirty ring interface Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-02  2:13   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-03 13:59     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-05 19:30       ` Peter Xu
2019-12-05 19:59         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-05 20:52           ` Peter Xu
2019-12-02 20:21   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 20:43     ` Peter Xu
2019-12-04 10:39 ` Jason Wang
2019-12-04 19:33   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-05  6:49     ` Jason Wang
2019-12-11 13:41 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2019-12-11 14:16   ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-11 17:15     ` Peter Xu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=20191210155259.GD3352@xz-x1 \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.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

KVM Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/0 kvm/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 kvm kvm/ https://lore.kernel.org/kvm \
		kvm@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index kvm

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.kvm


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git