From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAB85C433ED for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2021 01:01:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A3A66113A for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2021 01:01:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2A3A66113A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:Reply-To:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Cc:To:From:Subject:References:Mime-Version: Message-Id:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=fqAXhT9S7T9mqju8076WHUC5fRgA6lxaV3Voxd6s4uI=; b=A+rd8un+/gaus9+2q8yeRSkLI 2PyCMgabnx5L+keBJbLfn5m2/kLce0ZJrpXJsRFQtn12jG2uuCFrc6tGu8Fpfeh7dha/u/La5VY9y jpd3sCSKsV30Lo7+ohC9z8QuJx+h0C83wimmq1OSbtACwNeQY32aEUzcY8pweIajxlKoUJo5CQxEe WIrqvA/Ov4JhEuY11/q8hJl/rTsDAJXiWMCe1OM91MFESe7FJcEcyzzH8nlx4/vO3g6zxm3VqCD1C SrHKVq1PWS/GQJ9zkYVzfBs9BnBkSuDuHRNUSd4jUffM3qAZR5Il5cjRuZi+NurAP3Zl8SGorWz+T INPAW7BhA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lS8A9-00BZg8-H9; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 00:59:50 +0000 Received: from mail-yb1-xb49.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::b49]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lS87m-00BYsG-Ud for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 00:57:25 +0000 Received: by mail-yb1-xb49.google.com with SMTP id 71so4560257ybl.0 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 17:57:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=reply-to:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:from:to:cc; bh=C3aZnevHleE8p3XJKln/4r7iVsuYY+IWqHwKw7jbYZw=; b=rqAz0oKwg+xO+mqrd/TjAqHUu8EArbD/uuJGl7OKeBcY3EwrHR9gQRQe0GvHDQcbO1 TIhniaZ8jINCps9CIjZsN7kHjzSXtmyQjArZQoJmr6yXjaYfIPpYiVrCT4HaPfh1j2yx 1mTrVvzXlMCQhkTCOXnrqYezeg2n0qnNstVACti7MGtSCc7Mn0xeApxKkkFdybx8Qwa4 dW6zby8GfzrKIHI+e4hSp5xu7wY/rLusRKL8ViD/EbLaC7KG2YECDq4QlOssGCHrxNP9 wgUVLhXlSm+YIFfm/2xqy0d1HCwgoyoWZ78lO5MGEaw+LGDqY6eZwfL3ZC4K6ZeIge1Z H4vw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:date:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=C3aZnevHleE8p3XJKln/4r7iVsuYY+IWqHwKw7jbYZw=; b=ijOVtWqoJgqGqfnyzYcST4g8myouRCiBtz6lcaFCTvhu2exKJbijuLTVTlIpJJ21DG 7kMt1Vzk8fLsk8K4nCDoYDYSNu3xQkXTY9Q7pYIHvFxMDXV7zogxbQbxs5o15bjXzEos BBYJLSk5saItjakbx0hs0LoVw2pgr94BawaeyRnXPWbVS1/KJJJur9XOIMp5xZpdPBFN lGbbJa4E5b6paF66w9jOlG6lMT3aUETZJSfXyp4F0i9UpkLvD4DNU2Olaq6JsbUD3KJz +BZitx4fMgFixHZLtyS04kUtXhxMeCsDI3n0Xz+2qFejg3VbRhIHGb1Wg3IpXdl3UtXf 0ptg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530KFz1wvX7lkNICwGozP1tSSC2zLJj9x0ZGNBZaxLtMASjADr2t iZiO+c0CKCmioiljLtYeTm1swSBv45s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwqtEf1xCZRZlu0eDHw+f5rnx5wV3GYiZnH8BaCyZHgsIqWaN0RCtqefaVKt0oXIFZucaajI8x4kac= X-Received: from seanjc798194.pdx.corp.google.com ([2620:15c:f:10:c0b4:8b8:bb34:6a56]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a25:74d2:: with SMTP id p201mr16376013ybc.406.1617325041100; Thu, 01 Apr 2021 17:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 17:56:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com> Message-Id: <20210402005658.3024832-10-seanjc@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog Subject: [PATCH v2 09/10] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary From: Sean Christopherson To: Marc Zyngier , Huacai Chen , Aleksandar Markovic , Paul Mackerras , Paolo Bonzini Cc: James Morse , Julien Thierry , Suzuki K Poulose , Sean Christopherson , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Gardon X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210402_015723_155180_1D4A51A0 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 30.05 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Sean Christopherson Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Avoid taking mmu_lock for unrelated .invalidate_range_{start,end}() notifications. Because mmu_notifier_count must be modified while holding mmu_lock for write, and must always be paired across start->end to stay balanced, lock elision must happen in both or none. To meet that requirement, add a rwsem to prevent memslot updates across range_start() and range_end(). Use a rwsem instead of a rwlock since most notifiers _allow_ blocking, and the lock will be endl across the entire start() ... end() sequence. If anything in the sequence sleeps, including the caller or a different notifier, holding the spinlock would be disastrous. For notifiers that _disallow_ blocking, e.g. OOM reaping, simply go down the slow path of unconditionally acquiring mmu_lock. The sane alternative would be to try to acquire the lock and force the notifier to retry on failure. But since OOM is currently the _only_ scenario where blocking is disallowed attempting to optimize a guest that has been marked for death is pointless. Unconditionally define and use mmu_notifier_slots_lock in the memslots code, purely to avoid more #ifdefs. The overhead of acquiring the lock is negligible when the lock is uncontested, which will always be the case when the MMU notifiers are not used. Note, technically flag-only memslot updates could be allowed in parallel, but stalling a memslot update for a relatively short amount of time is not a scalability issue, and this is all more than complex enough. Based heavily on code from Ben Gardon. Suggested-by: Ben Gardon Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson --- include/linux/kvm_host.h | 6 ++- virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h index 40ac2d40bb5a..bc3dd2838bb8 100644 --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h @@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ struct kvm { #endif /* KVM_HAVE_MMU_RWLOCK */ struct mutex slots_lock; + struct rw_semaphore mmu_notifier_slots_lock; struct mm_struct *mm; /* userspace tied to this vm */ struct kvm_memslots __rcu *memslots[KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM]; struct kvm_vcpu *vcpus[KVM_MAX_VCPUS]; @@ -660,8 +661,9 @@ static inline struct kvm_memslots *__kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm, int as_id) { as_id = array_index_nospec(as_id, KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM); return srcu_dereference_check(kvm->memslots[as_id], &kvm->srcu, - lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock) || - !refcount_read(&kvm->users_count)); + lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock) || + lockdep_is_held(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock) || + !refcount_read(&kvm->users_count)); } static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm) diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c index f6697ad741ed..af28f39817a5 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c @@ -462,6 +462,7 @@ struct kvm_hva_range { pte_t pte; hva_handler_t handler; on_lock_fn_t on_lock; + bool must_lock; bool flush_on_ret; bool may_block; }; @@ -479,6 +480,25 @@ static void kvm_null_fn(void) } #define IS_KVM_NULL_FN(fn) ((fn) == (void *)kvm_null_fn) + +/* Acquire mmu_lock if necessary. Returns %true if @handler is "null" */ +static __always_inline bool kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(struct kvm *kvm, + const struct kvm_hva_range *range, + bool *locked) +{ + if (*locked) + return false; + + *locked = true; + + KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm); + + if (!IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->on_lock)) + range->on_lock(kvm, range->start, range->end); + + return IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->handler); +} + static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm, const struct kvm_hva_range *range) { @@ -495,16 +515,9 @@ static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm, idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->srcu); - /* The on_lock() path does not yet support lock elision. */ - if (!IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->on_lock)) { - locked = true; - KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm); - - range->on_lock(kvm, range->start, range->end); - - if (IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->handler)) - goto out_unlock; - } + if (range->must_lock && + kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(kvm, range, &locked)) + goto out_unlock; for (i = 0; i < KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM; i++) { slots = __kvm_memslots(kvm, i); @@ -534,10 +547,9 @@ static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_range.end = hva_to_gfn_memslot(hva_end + PAGE_SIZE - 1, slot); gfn_range.slot = slot; - if (!locked) { - locked = true; - KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm); - } + if (kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(kvm, range, &locked)) + goto out_unlock; + ret |= range->handler(kvm, &gfn_range); } } @@ -568,6 +580,7 @@ static __always_inline int kvm_handle_hva_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn, .pte = pte, .handler = handler, .on_lock = (void *)kvm_null_fn, + .must_lock = false, .flush_on_ret = true, .may_block = false, }; @@ -587,6 +600,7 @@ static __always_inline int kvm_handle_hva_range_no_flush(struct mmu_notifier *mn .pte = __pte(0), .handler = handler, .on_lock = (void *)kvm_null_fn, + .must_lock = false, .flush_on_ret = false, .may_block = false, }; @@ -603,11 +617,15 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_change_pte(struct mmu_notifier *mn, trace_kvm_set_spte_hva(address); /* - * .change_pte() must be bookended by .invalidate_range_{start,end}(), - * and so always runs with an elevated notifier count. This obviates - * the need to bump the sequence count. + * .change_pte() must be bookended by .invalidate_range_{start,end}(). + * If mmu_notifier_count is zero, then start() didn't find a relevant + * memslot and wasn't forced down the slow path; rechecking here is + * unnecessary. This can only occur if memslot updates are blocked. */ - WARN_ON_ONCE(!kvm->mmu_notifier_count); + if (!kvm->mmu_notifier_count) { + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); + return; + } kvm_handle_hva_range(mn, address, address + 1, pte, kvm_set_spte_gfn); } @@ -644,6 +662,7 @@ static void kvm_inc_notifier_count(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start, static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn, const struct mmu_notifier_range *range) { + bool blockable = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range); struct kvm *kvm = mmu_notifier_to_kvm(mn); const struct kvm_hva_range hva_range = { .start = range->start, @@ -651,12 +670,29 @@ static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn, .pte = __pte(0), .handler = kvm_unmap_gfn_range, .on_lock = kvm_inc_notifier_count, + .must_lock = !blockable, .flush_on_ret = true, - .may_block = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range), + .may_block = blockable, }; trace_kvm_unmap_hva_range(range->start, range->end); + /* + * Prevent memslot modification between range_start() and range_end() + * so that conditionally locking provides the same result in both + * functions. Without that guarantee, the mmu_notifier_count + * adjustments will be imbalanced. + * + * Skip the memslot-lookup lock elision (set @must_lock above) to avoid + * having to take the semaphore on non-blockable calls, e.g. OOM kill. + * The complexity required to handle conditional locking for this case + * is not worth the marginal benefits, the VM is likely doomed anyways. + * + * Pairs with the unlock in range_end(). + */ + if (blockable) + down_read(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); + __kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &hva_range); return 0; @@ -683,6 +719,7 @@ static void kvm_dec_notifier_count(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start, static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn, const struct mmu_notifier_range *range) { + bool blockable = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range); struct kvm *kvm = mmu_notifier_to_kvm(mn); const struct kvm_hva_range hva_range = { .start = range->start, @@ -690,12 +727,17 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn, .pte = __pte(0), .handler = (void *)kvm_null_fn, .on_lock = kvm_dec_notifier_count, + .must_lock = !blockable, .flush_on_ret = true, - .may_block = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range), + .may_block = blockable, }; __kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &hva_range); + /* Pairs with the lock in range_start(). */ + if (blockable) + up_read(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); + BUG_ON(kvm->mmu_notifier_count < 0); } @@ -908,6 +950,7 @@ static struct kvm *kvm_create_vm(unsigned long type) mutex_init(&kvm->lock); mutex_init(&kvm->irq_lock); mutex_init(&kvm->slots_lock); + init_rwsem(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->devices); BUILD_BUG_ON(KVM_MEM_SLOTS_NUM > SHRT_MAX); @@ -1028,6 +1071,16 @@ static void kvm_destroy_vm(struct kvm *kvm) kvm_coalesced_mmio_free(kvm); #if defined(CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER) && defined(KVM_ARCH_WANT_MMU_NOTIFIER) mmu_notifier_unregister(&kvm->mmu_notifier, kvm->mm); + /* + * Reset the lock used to prevent memslot updates between MMU notifier + * invalidate_range_start() and invalidate_range_end(). At this point, + * no more MMU notifiers will run and pending calls to ...start() have + * completed. But, the lock could still be held if KVM's notifier was + * removed between ...start() and ...end(). No threads can be waiting + * on the lock as the last reference on KVM has been dropped. If the + * lock is still held, freeing memslots will deadlock. + */ + init_rwsem(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); #else kvm_arch_flush_shadow_all(kvm); #endif @@ -1279,7 +1332,10 @@ static struct kvm_memslots *install_new_memslots(struct kvm *kvm, WARN_ON(gen & KVM_MEMSLOT_GEN_UPDATE_IN_PROGRESS); slots->generation = gen | KVM_MEMSLOT_GEN_UPDATE_IN_PROGRESS; + down_write(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots[as_id], slots); + up_write(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock); + synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu); /* -- 2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel