From: "Suthikulpanit, Suravee" <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
To: "Jan H. Schönherr" <jschoenh@amazon.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] svm: Temporary deactivate AVIC during ExtINT handling
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:58:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5f86b2ac-3a62-ab3d-ea00-59f1aaafa3f1@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a31f3f85-d94c-b139-ec69-d148dae5c67f@amazon.de>
Hi Jan,
On 5/8/19 12:37 PM, Jan H. Schönherr wrote:
> [CAUTION: External Email]
>
> Hi Suravee.
>
> I wonder, how this interacts with Hyper-V SynIC; see comments below.
>
> On 22/03/2019 12.57, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
>> AMD AVIC does not support ExtINT. Therefore, AVIC must be temporary
>> deactivated and fall back to using legacy interrupt injection via
>> vINTR and interrupt window.
>>
>> Introduce svm_request_activate/deactivate_avic() helper functions,
>> which handle steps required to activate/deactivate AVIC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> index f41f34f70dde..84116e689d5f 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> @@ -391,6 +391,8 @@ static u8 rsm_ins_bytes[] = "\x0f\xaa";
>> static void svm_set_cr0(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long cr0);
>> static void svm_flush_tlb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool invalidate_gpa);
>> static void svm_complete_interrupts(struct vcpu_svm *svm);
>> +static void svm_request_activate_avic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>> +static bool svm_get_enable_apicv(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>
>> static int nested_svm_exit_handled(struct vcpu_svm *svm);
>> static int nested_svm_intercept(struct vcpu_svm *svm);
>> @@ -2109,6 +2111,9 @@ static void avic_set_running(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool is_run)
>> {
>> struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>>
>> + if (!kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu))
>> + return;
>> +
>> svm->avic_is_running = is_run;
>> if (is_run)
>> avic_vcpu_load(vcpu, vcpu->cpu);
>> @@ -2356,6 +2361,10 @@ static void svm_vcpu_blocking(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>
>> static void svm_vcpu_unblocking(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_APICV_ACTIVATE, vcpu))
>> + kvm_vcpu_activate_apicv(vcpu);
>> + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_APICV_DEACTIVATE, vcpu))
>> + kvm_vcpu_deactivate_apicv(vcpu);
>> avic_set_running(vcpu, true);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -4505,6 +4514,15 @@ static int interrupt_window_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> {
>> kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, &svm->vcpu);
>> svm_clear_vintr(svm);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For AVIC, the only reason to end up here is ExtINTs.
>> + * In this case AVIC was temporarily disabled for
>> + * requesting the IRQ window and we have to re-enable it.
>> + */
>> + if (svm_get_enable_apicv(&svm->vcpu))
>> + svm_request_activate_avic(&svm->vcpu);
>> +
>
> Are we sure, we're not accidentally re-enabling AVIC, if it was disabled via
> kvm_hv_activate_synic()?
Actually, I missed this case. Now I have a solution that I'll be send out for review in V2.
>> svm->vmcb->control.int_ctl &= ~V_IRQ_MASK;
>> mark_dirty(svm->vmcb, VMCB_INTR);
>> ++svm->vcpu.stat.irq_window_exits;
>> @@ -5206,6 +5224,34 @@ static void svm_hwapic_isr_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int max_isr)
>> {
>> }
>>
>> +static bool is_avic_active(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> +{
>> + return (svm_get_enable_apicv(&svm->vcpu) &&
>> + svm->vmcb->control.int_ctl & AVIC_ENABLE_MASK);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void svm_request_activate_avic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> + struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>> +
>> + if (!lapic_in_kernel(vcpu) || is_avic_active(svm))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + avic_setup_access_page(vcpu, false);
>> + kvm_make_apicv_activate_request(vcpu->kvm);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void svm_request_deactivate_avic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> + struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>> +
>> + if (!lapic_in_kernel(vcpu) || !is_avic_active(svm))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + avic_destroy_access_page(vcpu);
>
> Something like avic_destroy_access_page() is not called, when AVIC is
> disabled via kvm_hv_activate_synic().
>
> Is that an oversight in the other code path, is it not needed here,
> or am I missing something?
This is an oversight. I also have a fix for this in V2.
Thanks,
Suravee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-03 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-22 11:57 [PATCH 0/6] KVM/x86: Add workaround to support ExtINT with AVIC Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 1/6] KVM: x86: Add callback functions for handling APIC ID, DFR and LDR update Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-07-03 21:16 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-07-17 19:44 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 2/6] svm: Add AMD AVIC handlers for " Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 3/6] svm: Add support for APIC_ACCESS_PAGE_PRIVATE_MEMSLOT setup/destroy Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-05-08 19:14 ` Jan H. Schönherr
2019-06-30 16:19 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 4/6] kvm: lapic: Add apicv activate/deactivate helper function Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-05-08 22:27 ` Jan H. Schönherr
2019-07-15 22:35 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 5/6] KVM: x86: Add interface for run-time activate/de-activate APIC virtualization Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-05-08 20:45 ` Jan H. Schönherr
2019-03-22 11:57 ` [PATCH 6/6] svm: Temporary deactivate AVIC during ExtINT handling Suthikulpanit, Suravee
2019-05-08 17:37 ` Jan H. Schönherr
2019-06-03 18:58 ` Suthikulpanit, Suravee [this message]
2019-04-04 21:30 ` [PATCH 0/6] KVM/x86: Add workaround to support ExtINT with AVIC rkrcmar
2019-04-04 22:06 ` rkrcmar
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=5f86b2ac-3a62-ab3d-ea00-59f1aaafa3f1@amd.com \
--to=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jschoenh@amazon.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).