* Can we boot a 512U kvm guest?
@ 2019-08-13 8:50 Zenghui Yu
[not found] ` <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
2019-08-22 9:08 ` Auger Eric
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Zenghui Yu @ 2019-08-13 8:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kvmarm, qemu-arm
Cc: Marc Zyngier, Eric Auger, James Morse, Julien Thierry,
suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D),
zhang.zhanghailiang
Hi folks,
Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to
512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to
start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two*
reasons (limitations).
First I got a QEMU abort:
"kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument"
Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with
vcpu-256, I got:
"Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0"
and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space...
So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16])
in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a
PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits.
I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff:
---8<---
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
@@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events {
#define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1
/* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */
-#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24
-#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff
+#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28
+#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf
#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16
-#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff
+#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff
#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0
#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff
---8<---
It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with
old versions.
Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above):
"Failed to set device address: No space left on device"
We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for
each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the
maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000).
So we get a ENOSPC error here.
I don't know if the similar problems have been discussed before in ML.
Is it time to really support the 512U guest?
Thanks,
zenghui
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread[parent not found: <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com>]
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? [not found] ` <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> @ 2019-08-13 21:44 ` Auger Eric 2019-08-14 6:51 ` Zenghui Yu 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Auger Eric @ 2019-08-13 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier, Zenghui Yu Cc: kvmarm, qemu-arm, James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi, On 8/13/19 4:17 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:50:27 +0100, > Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Zenghui, > >> >> Hi folks, >> >> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >> reasons (limitations). >> >> First I got a QEMU abort: >> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >> >> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >> vcpu-256, I got: >> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >> >> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. > > Irk. Not great indeed. Clearly, we have a couple of holes in the way > we test these ABI changes (/me eyes Eric...). My bad. At that time I was able to test with 224 vcpus with QEMU (256 vcpus were tested as well) and I failed to see those other limitations, thinking the only limitation left was the number of redistributor regions we could register. > >> >> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >> >> ---8<--- >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >> >> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >> >> ---8<--- >> >> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >> old versions. > > Yes, and we can't have that (specially if you consider that this API > is shared between 32 and 64bit). One "get out of jail card" is to > steal a few bits from the top of the word, and encode things there: > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > index 4602464ebdfb..86db092e4c2f 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > @@ -254,8 +254,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { > #define KVM_DEV_ARM_ITS_CTRL_RESET 4 > > /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT 28 > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > index 7b7ac0f6cec9..44cb25bfc95e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > @@ -308,8 +308,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { > #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 > > /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT 28 > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > index 90cedebaeb94..fb685c1c0514 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > @@ -889,6 +889,7 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_irq_level *irq_level, > > irq_type = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK; > vcpu_idx = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK; > + vcpu_idx += ((irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK) * (KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK + 1); > irq_num = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK; > > trace_kvm_irq_line(irq_type, vcpu_idx, irq_num, irq_level->level); > > It should work because we've been careful not to allow value outside > of {0, 1, 2} for irq_type. I don't like it, but I really don't feel > like adding another IRQ related ioctl. We still have 16 irq types > (which is already a waste of space), and we can go up to 4096 vcpu. > > Peter, what do you think? > >> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >> >> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >> So we get a ENOSPC error here. > > I can reproduce that issue here ("499 vcpus on my Chromebook, > baby"). Not an ABI problem though, and we can bump it up if that's > needed. > >> I don't know if the similar problems have been discussed before in ML. >> Is it time to really support the 512U guest? > > The real question is "why the hell would you want to do that?" ;-) > Seriously, I'm very interested in finding out what is the use case for > these gigantic VMs, other than debugging the kernel for big machines. The initial goal was to keep up with the HPC physical cpu count increase and allow similar numbers as x86 supports. Thanks Eric (with limited internet access atm) > > Thanks, > > M. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? [not found] ` <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> 2019-08-13 21:44 ` Auger Eric @ 2019-08-14 6:51 ` Zenghui Yu 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Zenghui Yu @ 2019-08-14 6:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier Cc: kvmarm, qemu-arm, Eric Auger, James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang On 2019/8/13 22:17, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:50:27 +0100, > Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Zenghui, > >> >> Hi folks, >> >> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >> reasons (limitations). >> >> First I got a QEMU abort: >> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >> >> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >> vcpu-256, I got: >> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >> >> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. > > Irk. Not great indeed. Clearly, we have a couple of holes in the way > we test these ABI changes (/me eyes Eric...). > >> >> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >> >> ---8<--- >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >> >> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >> >> ---8<--- >> >> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >> old versions. > > Yes, and we can't have that (specially if you consider that this API > is shared between 32 and 64bit). One "get out of jail card" is to > steal a few bits from the top of the word, and encode things there: > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > index 4602464ebdfb..86db092e4c2f 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > @@ -254,8 +254,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { > #define KVM_DEV_ARM_ITS_CTRL_RESET 4 > > /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT 28 > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > index 7b7ac0f6cec9..44cb25bfc95e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > @@ -308,8 +308,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { > #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 > > /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT 28 > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > index 90cedebaeb94..fb685c1c0514 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c > @@ -889,6 +889,7 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_irq_level *irq_level, > > irq_type = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK; > vcpu_idx = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK; > + vcpu_idx += ((irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU2_MASK) * (KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK + 1); > irq_num = (irq >> KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT) & KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK; > > trace_kvm_irq_line(irq_type, vcpu_idx, irq_num, irq_level->level); > > It should work because we've been careful not to allow value outside > of {0, 1, 2} for irq_type. I don't like it, but I really don't feel > like adding another IRQ related ioctl. We still have 16 irq types > (which is already a waste of space), and we can go up to 4096 vcpu. Hi Marc, Thanks for this. I can test it on my machine once user-space agrees with this change. > Peter, what do you think? > >> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >> >> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >> So we get a ENOSPC error here. > > I can reproduce that issue here ("499 vcpus on my Chromebook, > baby"). Not an ABI problem though, and we can bump it up if that's > needed. > >> I don't know if the similar problems have been discussed before in ML. >> Is it time to really support the 512U guest? > > The real question is "why the hell would you want to do that?" ;-) > Seriously, I'm very interested in finding out what is the use case for > these gigantic VMs, other than debugging the kernel for big machines. To be honest, I haven't seen any use case yet. In a typical production environment, *I think* we will not let the guest to have more CPUs than the host (and currently the maximum we have for host is 128). (It's just that someone complained that "why can't I start a VM with the max supported number of vcpus", and I started investigating yesterday.) Thanks, Zenghui ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-13 8:50 Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? Zenghui Yu [not found] ` <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> @ 2019-08-22 9:08 ` Auger Eric 2019-08-22 9:29 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-08-23 2:21 ` Zenghui Yu 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Auger Eric @ 2019-08-22 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zenghui Yu, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi Zenghui, On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: > Hi folks, > > Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to > 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to > start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* > reasons (limitations). > > First I got a QEMU abort: > "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" > > Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with > vcpu-256, I got: > "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" > and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... > > So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) > in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a > PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. > > I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: > > ---8<--- > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h > @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { > #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 > > /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 > -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff > +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 > #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff > > ---8<--- > > It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with > old versions. > > > Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): > "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" > > We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for > each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the > maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). > So we get a ENOSPC error here. Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise I can do it. You mentioned you started working on the QEMU fix. Do you plan to submit patches to the ML or do you want me to attempt to fix the situation on userspace? Thanks Eric > > > I don't know if the similar problems have been discussed before in ML. > Is it time to really support the 512U guest? > > > Thanks, > zenghui > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-22 9:08 ` Auger Eric @ 2019-08-22 9:29 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-08-22 9:50 ` Auger Eric 2019-08-23 2:21 ` Zenghui Yu 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2019-08-22 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Auger Eric, Zenghui Yu, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi Eric, On 22/08/2019 10:08, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Zenghui, > > On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >> reasons (limitations). >> >> First I got a QEMU abort: >> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >> >> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >> vcpu-256, I got: >> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >> >> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. >> >> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >> >> ---8<--- >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >> >> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >> >> ---8<--- >> >> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >> old versions. >> >> >> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >> >> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >> So we get a ENOSPC error here. > > Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise > I can do it. I really wonder whether that's a sensible thing to do on its own. Looking at the implementation of kvm_io_bus_register_dev (which copies the whole array each time we insert a device), we have an obvious issue with systems that create a large number of device structures, leading to large transient memory usage and slow guest start. We could also try and reduce the number of devices we insert by making the redistributor a single device (which it is in reality). It probably means we need to make the MMIO decoding more flexible. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-22 9:29 ` Marc Zyngier @ 2019-08-22 9:50 ` Auger Eric 2019-08-22 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Auger Eric @ 2019-08-22 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marc Zyngier, Zenghui Yu, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi Marc, On 8/22/19 11:29 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 22/08/2019 10:08, Auger Eric wrote: >> Hi Zenghui, >> >> On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >>> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >>> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >>> reasons (limitations). >>> >>> First I got a QEMU abort: >>> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >>> >>> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >>> vcpu-256, I got: >>> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >>> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >>> >>> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >>> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >>> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. >>> >>> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >>> >>> ---8<--- >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >>> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >>> >>> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >>> >>> ---8<--- >>> >>> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >>> old versions. >>> >>> >>> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >>> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >>> >>> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >>> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >>> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >>> So we get a ENOSPC error here. >> >> Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise >> I can do it. > > I really wonder whether that's a sensible thing to do on its own. > > Looking at the implementation of kvm_io_bus_register_dev (which copies > the whole array each time we insert a device), we have an obvious issue > with systems that create a large number of device structures, leading to > large transient memory usage and slow guest start. > > We could also try and reduce the number of devices we insert by making > the redistributor a single device (which it is in reality). It probably > means we need to make the MMIO decoding more flexible. Yes it makes sense. If no objection, I can work on this as I am the source of the mess ;-) Thanks Eric > > Thanks, > > M. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-22 9:50 ` Auger Eric @ 2019-08-22 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Marc Zyngier @ 2019-08-22 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Auger Eric, Zenghui Yu, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang On 22/08/2019 10:50, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Marc, > > On 8/22/19 11:29 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Hi Eric, >> >> On 22/08/2019 10:08, Auger Eric wrote: >>> Hi Zenghui, >>> >>> On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >>>> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >>>> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >>>> reasons (limitations). >>>> >>>> First I got a QEMU abort: >>>> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >>>> >>>> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >>>> vcpu-256, I got: >>>> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >>>> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >>>> >>>> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >>>> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >>>> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. >>>> >>>> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >>>> >>>> ---8<--- >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>>> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>>> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>>> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >>>> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >>>> >>>> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >>>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >>>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >>>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >>>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >>>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >>>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >>>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >>>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >>>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >>>> >>>> ---8<--- >>>> >>>> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >>>> old versions. >>>> >>>> >>>> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >>>> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >>>> >>>> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >>>> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >>>> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >>>> So we get a ENOSPC error here. >>> >>> Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise >>> I can do it. >> >> I really wonder whether that's a sensible thing to do on its own. >> >> Looking at the implementation of kvm_io_bus_register_dev (which copies >> the whole array each time we insert a device), we have an obvious issue >> with systems that create a large number of device structures, leading to >> large transient memory usage and slow guest start. >> >> We could also try and reduce the number of devices we insert by making >> the redistributor a single device (which it is in reality). It probably >> means we need to make the MMIO decoding more flexible. > > Yes it makes sense. If no objection, I can work on this as I am the > source of the mess ;-) Sure, if you have some spare bandwidth, feel free to give it a go. I'd certainly like to see the userspace counterpart to my earlier patch, and some agreement on the ABI change. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-22 9:08 ` Auger Eric 2019-08-22 9:29 ` Marc Zyngier @ 2019-08-23 2:21 ` Zenghui Yu 2019-08-23 7:37 ` Auger Eric 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Zenghui Yu @ 2019-08-23 2:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Auger Eric, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi Eric, On 2019/8/22 17:08, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Zenghui, > > On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >> reasons (limitations). >> >> First I got a QEMU abort: >> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >> >> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >> vcpu-256, I got: >> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >> >> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. >> >> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >> >> ---8<--- >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >> >> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >> >> ---8<--- >> >> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >> old versions. >> >> >> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >> >> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >> So we get a ENOSPC error here. > > Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise > I can do it. [...] > You mentioned you started working on the QEMU fix. Do you plan to submit > patches to the ML or do you want me to attempt to fix the situation on > userspace? Actually, I haven't started anything yet. It would be great if you can help to fix this in QEMU. Yes, please help. :) And please cc me when you send the patch so that I can do some tests in the free time. Many thanks, zenghui ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? 2019-08-23 2:21 ` Zenghui Yu @ 2019-08-23 7:37 ` Auger Eric 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Auger Eric @ 2019-08-23 7:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zenghui Yu, kvmarm, qemu-arm Cc: Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Julien Thierry, suzuki.poulose, peter.maydell, kvm, Wanghaibin (D), zhang.zhanghailiang Hi Zenghui, On 8/23/19 4:21 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 2019/8/22 17:08, Auger Eric wrote: >> Hi Zenghui, >> >> On 8/13/19 10:50 AM, Zenghui Yu wrote: >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Since commit e25028c8ded0 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Bump VGIC_V3_MAX_CPUS to >>> 512"), we seemed to be allowed to boot a 512U guest. But I failed to >>> start it up with the latest QEMU. I guess there are at least *two* >>> reasons (limitations). >>> >>> First I got a QEMU abort: >>> "kvm_set_irq: Invalid argument" >>> >>> Enable the trace_kvm_irq_line() under debugfs, when it comed with >>> vcpu-256, I got: >>> "Inject UNKNOWN interrupt (3), vcpu->idx: 0, num: 23, level: 0" >>> and kvm_vm_ioctl_irq_line() returns -EINVAL to user-space... >>> >>> So the thing is that we only have 8 bits for vcpu_index field ([23:16]) >>> in KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl. irq_type field will be corrupted if we inject a >>> PPI to vcpu-256, whose vcpu_index will take 9 bits. >>> >>> I temporarily patched the KVM and QEMU with the following diff: >>> >>> ---8<--- >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> index 95516a4..39a0fb1 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h >>> @@ -325,10 +325,10 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_events { >>> #define KVM_ARM_VCPU_TIMER_IRQ_PTIMER 1 >>> >>> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */ >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24 >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 28 >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xf >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_SHIFT 16 >>> -#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xff >>> +#define KVM_ARM_IRQ_VCPU_MASK 0xfff >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_SHIFT 0 >>> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_NUM_MASK 0xffff >>> >>> ---8<--- >>> >>> It makes things a bit better, it also immediately BREAKs the api with >>> old versions. >>> >>> >>> Next comes one more QEMU abort (with the "fix" above): >>> "Failed to set device address: No space left on device" >>> >>> We register two io devices (rd_dev and sgi_dev) on KVM_MMIO_BUS for >>> each redistributor. 512 vcpus take 1024 io devices, which is beyond the >>> maximum limitation of the current kernel - NR_IOBUS_DEVS (1000). >>> So we get a ENOSPC error here. >> >> Do you plan to send a patch for increasing the NR_IOBUS_DEVS? Otherwise >> I can do it. > > [...] > >> You mentioned you started working on the QEMU fix. Do you plan to submit >> patches to the ML or do you want me to attempt to fix the situation on >> userspace? > Actually, I haven't started anything yet. It would be great if you can > help to fix this in QEMU. Yes, please help. :) > > And please cc me when you send the patch so that I can do some tests in > the free time. Sure, I will work on this. Thanks Eric > > > Many thanks, > zenghui > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-08-23 7:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-08-13 8:50 Can we boot a 512U kvm guest? Zenghui Yu
[not found] ` <86d0h9no9j.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
2019-08-13 21:44 ` Auger Eric
2019-08-14 6:51 ` Zenghui Yu
2019-08-22 9:08 ` Auger Eric
2019-08-22 9:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-22 9:50 ` Auger Eric
2019-08-22 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-23 2:21 ` Zenghui Yu
2019-08-23 7:37 ` Auger Eric
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).