* [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi()
@ 2019-09-04 22:28 Michael Roth
2019-09-05 3:04 ` Michael Ellerman
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Roth @ 2019-09-04 22:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev; +Cc: kvm-ppc, Nicholas Piggin
On a 2-socket Witherspoon system with 128 cores and 1TB of memory
running the following guest configs:
guest A:
- 224GB of memory
- 56 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=28,threads=2), where:
VCPUs 0-1 are pinned to CPUs 0-3,
VCPUs 2-3 are pinned to CPUs 4-7,
...
VCPUs 54-55 are pinned to CPUs 108-111
guest B:
- 4GB of memory
- 4 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=4,threads=1)
with the following workloads (with KSM and THP enabled in all):
guest A:
stress --cpu 40 --io 20 --vm 20 --vm-bytes 512M
guest B:
stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 4 --vm-bytes 512M
host:
stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 2 --vm-bytes 256M
the below soft-lockup traces were observed after an hour or so and
persisted until the host was reset (this was found to be reliably
reproducible for this configuration, for kernels 4.15, 4.18, 5.0,
and 5.3-rc5):
[ 1253.183290] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
[ 1253.183319] rcu: 124-....: (5250 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=1941
[ 1256.287426] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#105 stuck for 23s! [CPU 52/KVM:19709]
[ 1264.075773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#24 stuck for 23s! [worker:19913]
[ 1264.079769] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#31 stuck for 23s! [worker:20331]
[ 1264.095770] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#45 stuck for 23s! [worker:20338]
[ 1264.131773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#64 stuck for 23s! [avocado:19525]
[ 1280.408480] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
[ 1316.198012] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
[ 1316.198032] rcu: 124-....: (21003 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=8243
[ 1340.411024] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
[ 1379.212609] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
[ 1379.212629] rcu: 124-....: (36756 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=14714
[ 1404.413615] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
[ 1442.227095] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
[ 1442.227115] rcu: 124-....: (52509 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=21403
[ 1455.111787] INFO: task worker:19907 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.111822] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.111833] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.111884] INFO: task worker:19908 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.111905] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.111925] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.111966] INFO: task worker:20328 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.111986] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.111998] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.112048] INFO: task worker:20330 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.112068] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.112097] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.112138] INFO: task worker:20332 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.112159] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.112179] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.112210] INFO: task worker:20333 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.112231] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.112242] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.112282] INFO: task worker:20335 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.112303] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
[ 1455.112332] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
[ 1455.112372] INFO: task worker:20336 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 1455.112392] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
CPU 45/0x2d, 24/0x18, 124/0x7c are stuck on spin locks, likely held by
CPUs 105/31
CPU 105/0x69, and 31/0x1f are stuck in smp_call_function_many(),
waiting on target CPU 42. For instance:
69:mon> r
R00 = c00000000020b20c R16 = 00007d1bcd800000
R01 = c00000363eaa7970 R17 = 0000000000000001
R02 = c0000000019b3a00 R18 = 000000000000006b
R03 = 000000000000002a R19 = 00007d537d7aecf0
R04 = 000000000000002a R20 = 60000000000000e0
R05 = 000000000000002a R21 = 0801000000000080
R06 = c0002073fb0caa08 R22 = 0000000000000d60
R07 = c0000000019ddd78 R23 = 0000000000000001
R08 = 000000000000002a R24 = c00000000147a700
R09 = 0000000000000001 R25 = c0002073fb0ca908
R10 = c000008ffeb4e660 R26 = 0000000000000000
R11 = c0002073fb0ca900 R27 = c0000000019e2464
R12 = c000000000050790 R28 = c0000000000812b0
R13 = c000207fff623e00 R29 = c0002073fb0ca808
R14 = 00007d1bbee00000 R30 = c0002073fb0ca800
R15 = 00007d1bcd600000 R31 = 0000000000000800
pc = c00000000020b260 smp_call_function_many+0x3d0/0x460
cfar= c00000000020b270 smp_call_function_many+0x3e0/0x460
lr = c00000000020b20c smp_call_function_many+0x37c/0x460
msr = 900000010288b033 cr = 44024824
ctr = c000000000050790 xer = 0000000000000000 trap = 100
CPU 42 is running normally, doing VCPU work:
1f:mon> c2a
[link register ] c00800001be17188 kvmppc_book3s_radix_page_fault+0x90/0x2b0 [kvm_hv]
[c000008ed3343820] c000008ed3343850 (unreliable)
[c000008ed33438d0] c00800001be11b6c kvmppc_book3s_hv_page_fault+0x264/0xe30 [kvm_hv]
[c000008ed33439d0] c00800001be0d7b4 kvmppc_vcpu_run_hv+0x8dc/0xb50 [kvm_hv]
[c000008ed3343ae0] c00800001c10891c kvmppc_vcpu_run+0x34/0x48 [kvm]
[c000008ed3343b00] c00800001c10475c kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x244/0x420 [kvm]
[c000008ed3343b90] c00800001c0f5a78 kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x470/0x7c8 [kvm]
[c000008ed3343d00] c000000000475450 do_vfs_ioctl+0xe0/0xc70
[c000008ed3343db0] c0000000004760e4 ksys_ioctl+0x104/0x120
[c000008ed3343e00] c000000000476128 sys_ioctl+0x28/0x80
[c000008ed3343e20] c00000000000b388 system_call+0x5c/0x70
--- Exception: c00 (System Call) at 00007d545cfd7694
SP (7d53ff7edf50) is in userspace
It was subsequently found that ipi_message[PPC_MSG_CALL_FUNCTION]
was set for CPU 42 by at least 1 of the CPUs waiting in
smp_call_function_many(), but somehow the corresponding
call_single_queue entries were never processed, causing the callers
to spin in csd_lock_wait() indefinitely.
Nick Piggin suggested something similar to the following sequence as
a possible explanation (interleaving of CALL_FUNCTION/RESCHEDULE
IPI messages seems to be most common, but any mix of CALL_FUNCTION and
!CALL_FUNCTION messages could trigger it):
CPU
X: smp_mb()
X: ipi_message[RESCHEDULE] = 1
X: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1)
X: smp_mb()
X: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
42: doorbell_exception() (from CPU X)
42: msgsync
105: smb_mb()
105: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1)
42: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0)
42: smp_ipi_demux_relaxed()
42: // returns to executing guest
105: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1 // due to re-ordering
105: smp_mb()
105: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
42: local_paca->kvm_hstate.host_ipi == 0 // IPI ignored
105: // hangs waiting on 42 to process messages/call_single_queue
This patch avoids that scenario by placing a barrier at the start
of kvmppc_set_host_ipi() such that the storing of these messages (or
other state indicated by host_ipi being set) cannot be re-ordered past
it.
With this the above workload ran for 6 hours (so far) without
triggering any lock-ups.
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
index 2484e6a8f5ca..254abad0f55e 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
@@ -454,6 +454,7 @@ static inline u32 kvmppc_get_xics_latch(void)
static inline void kvmppc_set_host_ipi(int cpu, u8 host_ipi)
{
+ smp_mb();
paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi = host_ipi;
}
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi()
2019-09-04 22:28 [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi() Michael Roth
@ 2019-09-05 3:04 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-09-05 23:21 ` Michael Roth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Ellerman @ 2019-09-05 3:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Roth, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Nicholas Piggin, kvm-ppc
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the patch & great change log, just a few comments.
Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On a 2-socket Witherspoon system with 128 cores and 1TB of memory
^
Power9 (not everyone knows what a Witherspoon is)
> running the following guest configs:
>
> guest A:
> - 224GB of memory
> - 56 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=28,threads=2), where:
> VCPUs 0-1 are pinned to CPUs 0-3,
> VCPUs 2-3 are pinned to CPUs 4-7,
> ...
> VCPUs 54-55 are pinned to CPUs 108-111
>
> guest B:
> - 4GB of memory
> - 4 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=4,threads=1)
>
> with the following workloads (with KSM and THP enabled in all):
>
> guest A:
> stress --cpu 40 --io 20 --vm 20 --vm-bytes 512M
>
> guest B:
> stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 4 --vm-bytes 512M
>
> host:
> stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 2 --vm-bytes 256M
>
> the below soft-lockup traces were observed after an hour or so and
> persisted until the host was reset (this was found to be reliably
> reproducible for this configuration, for kernels 4.15, 4.18, 5.0,
> and 5.3-rc5):
>
> [ 1253.183290] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 1253.183319] rcu: 124-....: (5250 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=1941
> [ 1256.287426] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#105 stuck for 23s! [CPU 52/KVM:19709]
> [ 1264.075773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#24 stuck for 23s! [worker:19913]
> [ 1264.079769] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#31 stuck for 23s! [worker:20331]
> [ 1264.095770] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#45 stuck for 23s! [worker:20338]
> [ 1264.131773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#64 stuck for 23s! [avocado:19525]
> [ 1280.408480] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> [ 1316.198012] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 1316.198032] rcu: 124-....: (21003 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=8243
> [ 1340.411024] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> [ 1379.212609] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 1379.212629] rcu: 124-....: (36756 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=14714
> [ 1404.413615] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> [ 1442.227095] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 1442.227115] rcu: 124-....: (52509 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=21403
> [ 1455.111787] INFO: task worker:19907 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.111822] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.111833] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.111884] INFO: task worker:19908 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.111905] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.111925] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.111966] INFO: task worker:20328 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.111986] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.111998] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.112048] INFO: task worker:20330 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.112068] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.112097] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.112138] INFO: task worker:20332 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.112159] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.112179] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.112210] INFO: task worker:20333 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.112231] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.112242] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.112282] INFO: task worker:20335 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.112303] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> [ 1455.112332] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 1455.112372] INFO: task worker:20336 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 1455.112392] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
There should be stack traces here, did they get lost or you omitted them
for brevity?
> CPU 45/0x2d, 24/0x18, 124/0x7c are stuck on spin locks, likely held by
> CPUs 105/31
That last one "105/31" is confusing because it looks like you're giving
the decimal/hex values again, but you're not.
I know xmon uses hex CPU numbers, but you don't actually refer to them
much in this change log, so it's probably clearer just to convert all
CPU numbers to decimal for the sake of the change log.
> CPU 105/0x69, and 31/0x1f are stuck in smp_call_function_many(),
> waiting on target CPU 42. For instance:
>
> 69:mon> r
I think here and below are the only places we have a hex CPU number, so
instead of using the xmon prompt just do eg:
Registers for CPU 105:
> R00 = c00000000020b20c R16 = 00007d1bcd800000
> R01 = c00000363eaa7970 R17 = 0000000000000001
> R02 = c0000000019b3a00 R18 = 000000000000006b
> R03 = 000000000000002a R19 = 00007d537d7aecf0
> R04 = 000000000000002a R20 = 60000000000000e0
> R05 = 000000000000002a R21 = 0801000000000080
> R06 = c0002073fb0caa08 R22 = 0000000000000d60
> R07 = c0000000019ddd78 R23 = 0000000000000001
> R08 = 000000000000002a R24 = c00000000147a700
> R09 = 0000000000000001 R25 = c0002073fb0ca908
> R10 = c000008ffeb4e660 R26 = 0000000000000000
> R11 = c0002073fb0ca900 R27 = c0000000019e2464
> R12 = c000000000050790 R28 = c0000000000812b0
> R13 = c000207fff623e00 R29 = c0002073fb0ca808
> R14 = 00007d1bbee00000 R30 = c0002073fb0ca800
> R15 = 00007d1bcd600000 R31 = 0000000000000800
> pc = c00000000020b260 smp_call_function_many+0x3d0/0x460
> cfar= c00000000020b270 smp_call_function_many+0x3e0/0x460
> lr = c00000000020b20c smp_call_function_many+0x37c/0x460
> msr = 900000010288b033 cr = 44024824
> ctr = c000000000050790 xer = 0000000000000000 trap = 100
>
> CPU 42 is running normally, doing VCPU work:
>
> 1f:mon> c2a
And similarly here just say "Backtrace for CPU 42:" and omit the xmon prompt.
> [link register ] c00800001be17188 kvmppc_book3s_radix_page_fault+0x90/0x2b0 [kvm_hv]
> [c000008ed3343820] c000008ed3343850 (unreliable)
> [c000008ed33438d0] c00800001be11b6c kvmppc_book3s_hv_page_fault+0x264/0xe30 [kvm_hv]
> [c000008ed33439d0] c00800001be0d7b4 kvmppc_vcpu_run_hv+0x8dc/0xb50 [kvm_hv]
> [c000008ed3343ae0] c00800001c10891c kvmppc_vcpu_run+0x34/0x48 [kvm]
> [c000008ed3343b00] c00800001c10475c kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x244/0x420 [kvm]
> [c000008ed3343b90] c00800001c0f5a78 kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x470/0x7c8 [kvm]
> [c000008ed3343d00] c000000000475450 do_vfs_ioctl+0xe0/0xc70
> [c000008ed3343db0] c0000000004760e4 ksys_ioctl+0x104/0x120
> [c000008ed3343e00] c000000000476128 sys_ioctl+0x28/0x80
> [c000008ed3343e20] c00000000000b388 system_call+0x5c/0x70
> --- Exception: c00 (System Call) at 00007d545cfd7694
> SP (7d53ff7edf50) is in userspace
>
> It was subsequently found that ipi_message[PPC_MSG_CALL_FUNCTION]
> was set for CPU 42 by at least 1 of the CPUs waiting in
> smp_call_function_many(), but somehow the corresponding
> call_single_queue entries were never processed, causing the callers
^
"by CPU 42" (just to be completely clear?)
> to spin in csd_lock_wait() indefinitely.
>
> Nick Piggin suggested something similar to the following sequence as
> a possible explanation (interleaving of CALL_FUNCTION/RESCHEDULE
> IPI messages seems to be most common, but any mix of CALL_FUNCTION and
> !CALL_FUNCTION messages could trigger it):
It's not very clear below where the smp_mb()'s and other functions you
refer to are located in the code, so worth commenting each I think, eg:
> CPU
X: smp_mb() // in smp_muxed_ipi_set_message()
> X: ipi_message[RESCHEDULE] = 1
X: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1) // in doorbell_global_ipi()
> X: smp_mb()
^
Where is that, I can't work out which one you're referring to?
We do call ppc_msgsnd_sync(), which is a `sync` which happens to be the
same thing as smp_mb()? But that's not very clear to me.
> X: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
> 42: doorbell_exception() (from CPU X)
> 42: msgsync
105: smb_mb() // in smp_muxed_ipi_set_message()
The key point is that the store we think we do here is reordered vs the
next store, at least from the other CPUs POV. So that's probably worth
explicitly annotating, something like:
105: store issued but delayed: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1 ...
Or some better syntax that someone else can think of :)
105: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1) // in doorbell_global_ipi()
> 42: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0)
> 42: smp_ipi_demux_relaxed()
> 42: // returns to executing guest
> 105: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1 // due to re-ordering
> 105: smp_mb()
> 105: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
> 42: local_paca->kvm_hstate.host_ipi == 0 // IPI ignored
> 105: // hangs waiting on 42 to process messages/call_single_queue
>
> This patch avoids that scenario by placing a barrier at the start
"prevents" is better than "avoids" IMHO.
> of kvmppc_set_host_ipi() such that the storing of these messages (or
> other state indicated by host_ipi being set) cannot be re-ordered past
> it.
I think I'd phrase it more like : ".. placing a barrier at the start of
kvmppc_set_host_ipi() so that stores to the ipi_message (or other state)
are ordered vs the store to host_ipi."
That raises the question of whether this needs to be a full barrier or
just a write barrier, and where is the matching barrier on the reading
side?
> With this the above workload ran for 6 hours (so far) without
s/this/that fix in place/
> triggering any lock-ups.
>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
> Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Can we think of a Fixes tag?
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> index 2484e6a8f5ca..254abad0f55e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> @@ -454,6 +454,7 @@ static inline u32 kvmppc_get_xics_latch(void)
>
> static inline void kvmppc_set_host_ipi(int cpu, u8 host_ipi)
> {
> + smp_mb();
This needs a big comment explaining why it's there and what it orders vs
what. I know you explained it all in the change log, but people don't
see that when they're browsing the code, so we need a summarised version
in a comment here please.
> paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi = host_ipi;
> }
cheers
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi()
2019-09-05 3:04 ` Michael Ellerman
@ 2019-09-05 23:21 ` Michael Roth
2019-09-10 21:31 ` Michael Roth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Roth @ 2019-09-05 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Ellerman, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Nicholas Piggin, kvm-ppc
Quoting Michael Ellerman (2019-09-04 22:04:48)
> Hi Mike,
>
> Thanks for the patch & great change log, just a few comments.
Hi Michael,
Thank you for the suggestions. I will roll them into v2 unless otherwise
noted below.
>
> Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> > On a 2-socket Witherspoon system with 128 cores and 1TB of memory
> ^
> Power9 (not everyone knows what a Witherspoon is)
>
> > running the following guest configs:
> >
> > guest A:
> > - 224GB of memory
> > - 56 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=28,threads=2), where:
> > VCPUs 0-1 are pinned to CPUs 0-3,
> > VCPUs 2-3 are pinned to CPUs 4-7,
> > ...
> > VCPUs 54-55 are pinned to CPUs 108-111
> >
> > guest B:
> > - 4GB of memory
> > - 4 VCPUs (sockets=1,cores=4,threads=1)
> >
> > with the following workloads (with KSM and THP enabled in all):
> >
> > guest A:
> > stress --cpu 40 --io 20 --vm 20 --vm-bytes 512M
> >
> > guest B:
> > stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 4 --vm-bytes 512M
> >
> > host:
> > stress --cpu 4 --io 4 --vm 2 --vm-bytes 256M
> >
> > the below soft-lockup traces were observed after an hour or so and
> > persisted until the host was reset (this was found to be reliably
> > reproducible for this configuration, for kernels 4.15, 4.18, 5.0,
> > and 5.3-rc5):
> >
> > [ 1253.183290] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> > [ 1253.183319] rcu: 124-....: (5250 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=1941
> > [ 1256.287426] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#105 stuck for 23s! [CPU 52/KVM:19709]
> > [ 1264.075773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#24 stuck for 23s! [worker:19913]
> > [ 1264.079769] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#31 stuck for 23s! [worker:20331]
> > [ 1264.095770] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#45 stuck for 23s! [worker:20338]
> > [ 1264.131773] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#64 stuck for 23s! [avocado:19525]
> > [ 1280.408480] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> > [ 1316.198012] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> > [ 1316.198032] rcu: 124-....: (21003 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=8243
> > [ 1340.411024] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> > [ 1379.212609] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> > [ 1379.212629] rcu: 124-....: (36756 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=14714
> > [ 1404.413615] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#124 stuck for 22s! [ksmd:791]
> > [ 1442.227095] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> > [ 1442.227115] rcu: 124-....: (52509 ticks this GP) idle=10a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=5408/5408 fqs=21403
> > [ 1455.111787] INFO: task worker:19907 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.111822] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.111833] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.111884] INFO: task worker:19908 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.111905] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.111925] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.111966] INFO: task worker:20328 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.111986] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.111998] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.112048] INFO: task worker:20330 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.112068] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.112097] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.112138] INFO: task worker:20332 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.112159] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.112179] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.112210] INFO: task worker:20333 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.112231] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.112242] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.112282] INFO: task worker:20335 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.112303] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
> > [ 1455.112332] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> > [ 1455.112372] INFO: task worker:20336 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> > [ 1455.112392] Tainted: G L 5.3.0-rc5-mdr-vanilla+ #1
>
> There should be stack traces here, did they get lost or you omitted them
> for brevity?
Both, I suppose :) This kernel was booted with 'quiet' option so I think the
traces were below CONFIG_CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_QUIET=4 threshold, but the above
output was more to characterize that this was a persistent/re-occurring
lock-up, where I think brevity helps.
I do have the traces from xmon for all the CPUs that reported a soft-lockup,
but in some instances we don't see any lockups from spinlock waiters so I
wanted to keep the focus on the smp_call_function_many() callers.
Here's the trace for one of the spinlock waiters, if you think it would
be helpful to incorporate some or all of these into the commit log I can
certainly add them.
# call trace/registers for CPU 124
47:mon> c7c
[link register ] c00000000039cba4 follow_page_mask+0x6f4/0xcd0
[c000008fe44c7b80] 0000000000000000 (unreliable)
[c000008fe44c7bb0] c00000000039d0e4 follow_page_mask+0xc34/0xcd0
[c000008fe44c7c40] c00000000039fef4 follow_page+0x44/0x110
[c000008fe44c7c90] c0000000003ff6c8 ksm_scan_thread+0x5e8/0x1f60
[c000008fe44c7db0] c00000000015e864 kthread+0x1a4/0x1b0
[c000008fe44c7e20] c00000000000b760 ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x7c
7c:mon> r
R00 = c00000000039cba4 R16 = 0000000000000000
R01 = c000008fe44c7b80 R17 = c000000001ca9a20
R02 = c0000000019b3a00 R18 = c000000001b626b0
R03 = c00c00000da5afe8 R19 = c00c00000da5afc0
R04 = 0000000000000009 R20 = c000003696bfc610
R05 = 0000000096bfc009 R21 = 0000000000000001
R06 = 0000000000000009 R22 = c000003696bfc000
R07 = 000000004d600386 R23 = 0000000000000610
R08 = 4000000000000800 R24 = c000000001b62740
R09 = 0000000080000069 R25 = c000000001b62738
R10 = 000000008000007c R26 = 00007d1c18490000
R11 = 0000000000000000 R27 = c000008fe44c7c68
R12 = 0000000000002000 R28 = 0000000000000000
R13 = c000207fff60e800 R29 = c00000363df40af0
R14 = c00c00000dd35800 R30 = c0000000019e1d80
R15 = 5deadbeef0000100 R31 = c00c00000da5afe8
pc = c000000000ea1eb8 _raw_spin_lock+0x68/0x100
cfar= c000000000ea1ee0 _raw_spin_lock+0x90/0x100
lr = c00000000039cba4 follow_page_mask+0x6f4/0xcd0
msr = 9000000000089033 cr = 24002824
ctr = 0000000000000000 xer = 0000000000000000 trap = 100
7c:mon> e
cpu 0x7c: Vector: 100 (System Reset) at [c000207fff133d70]
pc: c000000000ea1eb8: _raw_spin_lock+0x68/0x100
lr: c00000000039cba4: follow_page_mask+0x6f4/0xcd0
sp: c000008fe44c7b80
msr: 9000000000089033
current = 0xc000008fe6f94900
paca = 0xc000207fff60e800 irqmask: 0x03 irq_happened: 0x01
pid = 791, comm = ksmd
>
> > CPU 45/0x2d, 24/0x18, 124/0x7c are stuck on spin locks, likely held by
> > CPUs 105/31
>
> That last one "105/31" is confusing because it looks like you're giving
> the decimal/hex values again, but you're not.
>
> I know xmon uses hex CPU numbers, but you don't actually refer to them
> much in this change log, so it's probably clearer just to convert all
> CPU numbers to decimal for the sake of the change log.
>
> > CPU 105/0x69, and 31/0x1f are stuck in smp_call_function_many(),
> > waiting on target CPU 42. For instance:
> >
> > 69:mon> r
>
> I think here and below are the only places we have a hex CPU number, so
> instead of using the xmon prompt just do eg:
>
> Registers for CPU 105:
> > R00 = c00000000020b20c R16 = 00007d1bcd800000
> > R01 = c00000363eaa7970 R17 = 0000000000000001
> > R02 = c0000000019b3a00 R18 = 000000000000006b
> > R03 = 000000000000002a R19 = 00007d537d7aecf0
> > R04 = 000000000000002a R20 = 60000000000000e0
> > R05 = 000000000000002a R21 = 0801000000000080
> > R06 = c0002073fb0caa08 R22 = 0000000000000d60
> > R07 = c0000000019ddd78 R23 = 0000000000000001
> > R08 = 000000000000002a R24 = c00000000147a700
> > R09 = 0000000000000001 R25 = c0002073fb0ca908
> > R10 = c000008ffeb4e660 R26 = 0000000000000000
> > R11 = c0002073fb0ca900 R27 = c0000000019e2464
> > R12 = c000000000050790 R28 = c0000000000812b0
> > R13 = c000207fff623e00 R29 = c0002073fb0ca808
> > R14 = 00007d1bbee00000 R30 = c0002073fb0ca800
> > R15 = 00007d1bcd600000 R31 = 0000000000000800
> > pc = c00000000020b260 smp_call_function_many+0x3d0/0x460
> > cfar= c00000000020b270 smp_call_function_many+0x3e0/0x460
> > lr = c00000000020b20c smp_call_function_many+0x37c/0x460
> > msr = 900000010288b033 cr = 44024824
> > ctr = c000000000050790 xer = 0000000000000000 trap = 100
> >
> > CPU 42 is running normally, doing VCPU work:
> >
> > 1f:mon> c2a
>
> And similarly here just say "Backtrace for CPU 42:" and omit the xmon prompt.
>
> > [link register ] c00800001be17188 kvmppc_book3s_radix_page_fault+0x90/0x2b0 [kvm_hv]
> > [c000008ed3343820] c000008ed3343850 (unreliable)
> > [c000008ed33438d0] c00800001be11b6c kvmppc_book3s_hv_page_fault+0x264/0xe30 [kvm_hv]
> > [c000008ed33439d0] c00800001be0d7b4 kvmppc_vcpu_run_hv+0x8dc/0xb50 [kvm_hv]
> > [c000008ed3343ae0] c00800001c10891c kvmppc_vcpu_run+0x34/0x48 [kvm]
> > [c000008ed3343b00] c00800001c10475c kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x244/0x420 [kvm]
> > [c000008ed3343b90] c00800001c0f5a78 kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x470/0x7c8 [kvm]
> > [c000008ed3343d00] c000000000475450 do_vfs_ioctl+0xe0/0xc70
> > [c000008ed3343db0] c0000000004760e4 ksys_ioctl+0x104/0x120
> > [c000008ed3343e00] c000000000476128 sys_ioctl+0x28/0x80
> > [c000008ed3343e20] c00000000000b388 system_call+0x5c/0x70
> > --- Exception: c00 (System Call) at 00007d545cfd7694
> > SP (7d53ff7edf50) is in userspace
> >
> > It was subsequently found that ipi_message[PPC_MSG_CALL_FUNCTION]
> > was set for CPU 42 by at least 1 of the CPUs waiting in
> > smp_call_function_many(), but somehow the corresponding
> > call_single_queue entries were never processed, causing the callers
> ^
> "by CPU 42" (just to be completely clear?)
> > to spin in csd_lock_wait() indefinitely.
> >
> > Nick Piggin suggested something similar to the following sequence as
> > a possible explanation (interleaving of CALL_FUNCTION/RESCHEDULE
> > IPI messages seems to be most common, but any mix of CALL_FUNCTION and
> > !CALL_FUNCTION messages could trigger it):
>
> It's not very clear below where the smp_mb()'s and other functions you
> refer to are located in the code, so worth commenting each I think, eg:
>
> > CPU
> X: smp_mb() // in smp_muxed_ipi_set_message()
> > X: ipi_message[RESCHEDULE] = 1
> X: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1) // in doorbell_global_ipi()
> > X: smp_mb()
> ^
> Where is that, I can't work out which one you're referring to?
>
> We do call ppc_msgsnd_sync(), which is a `sync` which happens to be the
> same thing as smp_mb()? But that's not very clear to me.
Yes, that's the one. I thought it would be easier to reason about this
particular example by applying the smp_mb() naming, but I agree it should
be clarified better. Something like this maybe?
X: smp_mb() // via the `sync` in ppc_msgsnd_sync()
or would this be clearer?
X: ppc_msgsnd_sync() // same as smp_mb() in current code
>
> > X: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
> > 42: doorbell_exception() (from CPU X)
> > 42: msgsync
> 105: smb_mb() // in smp_muxed_ipi_set_message()
>
> The key point is that the store we think we do here is reordered vs the
> next store, at least from the other CPUs POV. So that's probably worth
> explicitly annotating, something like:
>
> 105: store issued but delayed: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1 ...
>
> Or some better syntax that someone else can think of :)
>
> 105: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1) // in doorbell_global_ipi()
> > 42: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0)
> > 42: smp_ipi_demux_relaxed()
> > 42: // returns to executing guest
> > 105: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1 // due to re-ordering
> > 105: smp_mb()
> > 105: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
> > 42: local_paca->kvm_hstate.host_ipi == 0 // IPI ignored
> > 105: // hangs waiting on 42 to process messages/call_single_queue
> >
> > This patch avoids that scenario by placing a barrier at the start
>
> "prevents" is better than "avoids" IMHO.
>
> > of kvmppc_set_host_ipi() such that the storing of these messages (or
> > other state indicated by host_ipi being set) cannot be re-ordered past
> > it.
>
> I think I'd phrase it more like : ".. placing a barrier at the start of
> kvmppc_set_host_ipi() so that stores to the ipi_message (or other state)
> are ordered vs the store to host_ipi."
>
> That raises the question of whether this needs to be a full barrier or
> just a write barrier, and where is the matching barrier on the reading
> side?
For this particular case I think the same barrier orders it on the
read-side via kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0) above, but I'm not sure that
work as a general solution, unless maybe we make that sort of usage
(clear-before-processing) part of the protocol of using
kvmppc_set_host_ipi()... it makes sense given we already need to take
care to not miss clearing them else we get issues like what was fixed
in 755563bc79c7, which introduced the clear in doorbell_exception(). So
then it's a matter of additionally making sure we do it prior to
processing host_ipi state. I haven't looked too closely at the other
users of kvmppc_set_host_ipi() yet though.
Alternatively, if I'm reading things right we currently have a four places
(A, B, C, and D below) that read host_ipi and branch when it's set:
in arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S:
kvmppc_check_wake_reason:
...
/* hypervisor doorbell */
3: li r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_H_DOORBELL
/*
* Clear the doorbell as we will invoke the handler
* explicitly in the guest exit path.
*/
lis r6, (PPC_DBELL_SERVER << (63-36))@h
PPC_MSGCLR(6)
/* see if it's a host IPI */
li r3, 1
BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
PPC_MSGSYNC
lwsync
END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_ARCH_300)
A)
lbz r0, HSTATE_HOST_IPI(r13)
cmpwi r0, 0
bnelr
/* if not, return -1 */
li r3, -1
blr
...
/* external interrupt - create a stack frame so we can call C */
7: mflr r0
std r0, PPC_LR_STKOFF(r1)
stdu r1, -PPC_MIN_STKFRM(r1)
B)
bl kvmppc_read_intr
nop
li r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_EXTERNAL
cmpdi r3, 1
ble 1f
kvmppc_interrupt_hv:
...
/* Hypervisor doorbell - exit only if host IPI flag set */
cmpwi r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_H_DOORBELL
bne 3f
BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
PPC_MSGSYNC
lwsync
/* always exit if we're running a nested guest */
ld r0, VCPU_NESTED(r9)
cmpdi r0, 0
bne guest_exit_cont
END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_ARCH_300)
C)
lbz r0, HSTATE_HOST_IPI(r13)
cmpwi r0, 0
beq maybe_reenter_guest
b guest_exit_cont
...
/* External interrupt ? */
cmpwi r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_EXTERNAL
beq kvmppc_guest_external
kvmppc_guest_external:
/* External interrupt, first check for host_ipi. If this is
* set, we know the host wants us out so let's do it now
*/
D)
bl kvmppc_read_intr
...
li r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_EXTERNAL
/*
* kvmppc_read_intr return codes:
*
* Exit to host (r3 > 0)
* 1 An interrupt is pending that needs to be handled by the host
* Exit guest and return to host by branching to guest_exit_cont
*
* 2 Passthrough that needs completion in the host
* Exit guest and return to host by branching to guest_exit_cont
* However, we also set r12 to BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_HV_RM_HARD
* to indicate to the host to complete handling the interrupt
*
* Before returning to guest, we check if any CPU is heading out
* to the host and if so, we head out also. If no CPUs are heading
* check return values <= 0.
*
* Return to guest (r3 <= 0)
* 0 No external interrupt is pending
* -1 A guest wakeup IPI (which has now been cleared)
* In either case, we return to guest to deliver any pending
* guest interrupts.
*
* -2 A PCI passthrough external interrupt was handled
* (interrupt was delivered directly to guest)
* Return to guest to deliver any pending guest interrupts.
*/
cmpdi r3, 1
ble 1f
/* Return code = 2 */
li r12, BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_HV_RM_HARD
stw r12, VCPU_TRAP(r9)
b guest_exit_cont
1: /* Return code <= 1 */
cmpdi r3, 0
bgt guest_exit_cont
We could add an explicit `sync` after A) and C), and an smp_mb() in the
2 places where we test for it and find it set in kvmppc_read_intr() to
cover instances like B) and D). I was thinking maybe guest_exit_cont was
a common point where we could cover all these cases but kvm_novcpu_wakeup
seems to be at least one exception, plus if we went that route we'd issue
smp_mb()'s in cases where we don't actually need them.
Definitely open to other alternatives.
As far as using rw barriers, I can't think of any reason we couldn't, but
I wouldn't say I'm at all confident in declaring that safe atm...
>
> > With this the above workload ran for 6 hours (so far) without
>
> s/this/that fix in place/
>
> > triggering any lock-ups.
> >
> > Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
> > Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> > Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Can we think of a Fixes tag?
For this particular issue I think:
Fixes: 755563bc79c7 ("powerpc/powernv: Fixes for hypervisor doorbell handling") # v4.0
>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> > index 2484e6a8f5ca..254abad0f55e 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
> > @@ -454,6 +454,7 @@ static inline u32 kvmppc_get_xics_latch(void)
> >
> > static inline void kvmppc_set_host_ipi(int cpu, u8 host_ipi)
> > {
> > + smp_mb();
>
> This needs a big comment explaining why it's there and what it orders vs
> what. I know you explained it all in the change log, but people don't
> see that when they're browsing the code, so we need a summarised version
> in a comment here please.
Yes, of course.
Thanks!
>
> > paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi = host_ipi;
> > }
>
>
> cheers
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi()
2019-09-05 23:21 ` Michael Roth
@ 2019-09-10 21:31 ` Michael Roth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael Roth @ 2019-09-10 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Ellerman, linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Nicholas Piggin, kvm-ppc
Quoting Michael Roth (2019-09-05 18:21:22)
> Quoting Michael Ellerman (2019-09-04 22:04:48)
> > That raises the question of whether this needs to be a full barrier or
> > just a write barrier, and where is the matching barrier on the reading
> > side?
>
> For this particular case I think the same barrier orders it on the
> read-side via kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0) above, but I'm not sure that
> work as a general solution, unless maybe we make that sort of usage
> (clear-before-processing) part of the protocol of using
> kvmppc_set_host_ipi()... it makes sense given we already need to take
> care to not miss clearing them else we get issues like what was fixed
> in 755563bc79c7, which introduced the clear in doorbell_exception(). So
> then it's a matter of additionally making sure we do it prior to
> processing host_ipi state. I haven't looked too closely at the other
> users of kvmppc_set_host_ipi() yet though.
<snip>
> As far as using rw barriers, I can't think of any reason we couldn't, but
> I wouldn't say I'm at all confident in declaring that safe atm...
I think we need a full barrier after all. The following seems possible
otherwise:
CPU
X: smp_mb()
X: ipi_message[RESCHEDULE] = 1
X: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1)
X: smp_mb()
X: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
42: doorbell_exception() (from CPU X)
42: msgsync
42: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0) // STORE DEFERRED DUE TO RE-ORDERING
42: smp_ipi_demux_relaxed()
105: smb_mb()
105: ipi_message[CALL_FUNCTION] = 1
105: smp_mb()
105: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 1)
42: kvmppc_set_host_ipi(42, 0) // RE-ORDERED STORE COMPLETES
42: // returns to executing guest
105: doorbell/msgsnd -> 42
42: local_paca->kvm_hstate.host_ipi == 0 // IPI ignored
105: // hangs waiting on 42 to process messages/call_single_queue
However that also means the current patch is insufficient, since the
barrier for preventing this scenario needs to come *after* setting
paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi to 0.
So I think the right interface is for this is to split
kvmppc_set_host_ipi out into:
static inline void kvmppc_set_host_ipi(int cpu)
{
smp_mb();
paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi = 1;
}
static inline void kvmppc_clear_host_ipi(int cpu)
{
paca_ptrs[cpu]->kvm_hstate.host_ipi = 0;
smp_mb();
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-09-10 21:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-09-04 22:28 [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: add smp_mb() in kvmppc_set_host_ipi() Michael Roth
2019-09-05 3:04 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-09-05 23:21 ` Michael Roth
2019-09-10 21:31 ` Michael Roth
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).