From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: mst@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 7/9] vhost: do not use RCU to synchronize MMU notifier with worker
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:02:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba5f375f-435a-91fd-7fca-bfab0915594b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190807120738.GB1557@ziepe.ca>
On 2019/8/7 下午8:07, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 03:06:15AM -0400, Jason Wang wrote:
>> We used to use RCU to synchronize MMU notifier with worker. This leads
>> calling synchronize_rcu() in invalidate_range_start(). But on a busy
>> system, there would be many factors that may slow down the
>> synchronize_rcu() which makes it unsuitable to be called in MMU
>> notifier.
>>
>> So this patch switches use seqlock counter to track whether or not the
>> map was used. The counter was increased when vq try to start or finish
>> uses the map. This means, when it was even, we're sure there's no
>> readers and MMU notifier is synchronized. When it was odd, it means
>> there's a reader we need to wait it to be even again then we are
>> synchronized. Consider the read critical section is pretty small the
>> synchronization should be done very fast.
>>
>> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>> Fixes: 7f466032dc9e ("vhost: access vq metadata through kernel virtual address")
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>> drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 7 ++-
>> 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
>> index cfc11f9ed9c9..57bfbb60d960 100644
>> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
>> @@ -324,17 +324,16 @@ static void vhost_uninit_vq_maps(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
>>
>> spin_lock(&vq->mmu_lock);
>> for (i = 0; i < VHOST_NUM_ADDRS; i++) {
>> - map[i] = rcu_dereference_protected(vq->maps[i],
>> - lockdep_is_held(&vq->mmu_lock));
>> + map[i] = vq->maps[i];
>> if (map[i]) {
>> vhost_set_map_dirty(vq, map[i], i);
>> - rcu_assign_pointer(vq->maps[i], NULL);
>> + vq->maps[i] = NULL;
>> }
>> }
>> spin_unlock(&vq->mmu_lock);
>>
>> - /* No need for synchronize_rcu() or kfree_rcu() since we are
>> - * serialized with memory accessors (e.g vq mutex held).
>> + /* No need for synchronization since we are serialized with
>> + * memory accessors (e.g vq mutex held).
>> */
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < VHOST_NUM_ADDRS; i++)
>> @@ -362,6 +361,40 @@ static bool vhost_map_range_overlap(struct vhost_uaddr *uaddr,
>> return !(end < uaddr->uaddr || start > uaddr->uaddr - 1 + uaddr->size);
>> }
>>
>> +static void inline vhost_vq_access_map_begin(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
>> +{
>> + write_seqcount_begin(&vq->seq);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void inline vhost_vq_access_map_end(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
>> +{
>> + write_seqcount_end(&vq->seq);
>> +}
> The write side of a seqlock only provides write barriers. Access to
>
> map = vq->maps[VHOST_ADDR_USED];
>
> Still needs a read side barrier, and then I think this will be no
> better than a normal spinlock.
>
> It also doesn't seem like this algorithm even needs a seqlock, as this
> is just a one bit flag
Right, so then I tend to use spinlock first for correctness.
>
> atomic_set_bit(using map)
> smp_mb__after_atomic()
> .. maps [...]
> atomic_clear_bit(using map)
>
>
> map = NULL;
> smp_mb__before_atomic();
> while (atomic_read_bit(using map))
> relax()
>
> Again, not clear this could be faster than a spinlock when the
> barriers are correct...
Yes, for next release we may want to use the idea from Michael like to
mitigate the impact of mb.
https://lwn.net/Articles/775871/
Thanks
>
> Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-07 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-07 7:06 [PATCH V4 0/9] Fixes for metadata accelreation Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 1/9] vhost: don't set uaddr for invalid address Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 2/9] vhost: validate MMU notifier registration Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 3/9] vhost: fix vhost map leak Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 4/9] vhost: reset invalidate_count in vhost_set_vring_num_addr() Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 5/9] vhost: mark dirty pages during map uninit Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 6/9] vhost: don't do synchronize_rcu() in vhost_uninit_vq_maps() Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 7/9] vhost: do not use RCU to synchronize MMU notifier with worker Jason Wang
2019-08-07 12:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-07 14:02 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2019-08-08 12:54 ` Jason Wang
2019-08-08 13:01 ` Jason Wang
2019-08-08 13:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-10 19:12 ` [PATCH V5 0/9] Fixes for vhost metadata acceleration Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 8/9] vhost: correctly set dirty pages in MMU notifiers callback Jason Wang
2019-08-07 7:06 ` [PATCH V4 9/9] vhost: do not return -EAGAIN for non blocking invalidation too early Jason Wang
2019-08-09 5:15 ` [PATCH V4 0/9] Fixes for metadata accelreation David Miller
2019-08-09 5:35 ` Jason Wang
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=ba5f375f-435a-91fd-7fca-bfab0915594b@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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 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).