From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>,
liran.alon@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] x68: acpi: trigger SMI before scanning for hotplugged CPUs
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:41:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b31defc1-a147-3dd3-b1de-b5f7651018b7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <515cc231-858a-a626-31a9-d74e1f6b4e38@redhat.com>
On 07/14/20 14:28, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> (CC'ing Peter Krempa due to virsh setvcpu (singular) / setvcpus (plural)
> references)
>
> On 07/10/20 18:17, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>> In case firmware has negotiated CPU hotplug SMI feature, generate
>> AML to describe SMI IO port region and send SMI to firmware
>> on each CPU hotplug SCI.
>>
>> It might be not really usable, but should serve as a starting point to
>> discuss how better to deal with split hotplug sequence during hot-add
>> (
>> ex scenario where it will break is:
>> hot-add
>> -> (QEMU) add CPU in hotplug regs
>> -> (QEMU) SCI
>> -1-> (OS) scan
>> -1-> (OS) SMI
>> -1-> (FW) pull in CPU1 ***
>> -1-> (OS) start iterating hotplug regs
>> hot-add
>> -> (QEMU) add CPU in hotplug regs
>> -> (QEMU) SCI
>> -2-> (OS) scan (blocked on mutex till previous scan is finished)
>> -1-> (OS) 1st added CPU1 send device check event -> INIT/SIPI
>> -1-> (OS) 1st added CPU2 send device check event -> INIT/SIPI
>> that's where it explodes, since FW didn't see CPU2
>> when SMI was called
>> )
>>
>> hot remove will throw in yet another set of problems, so lets discuss
>> both here and see if we can really share hotplug registers block between
>> FW and AML or we should do something else with it.
>
> This issue is generally triggered by management applications such as
> libvirt that issue device_add commands in quick succession. For libvirt,
> the command is "virsh setvcpus" (plural) with multiple CPUs specified
> for plugging. The singular "virsh setvcpu" command, which is more
> friendly towards guest NUMA, does not run into the symptom.
>
> The scope of the scan method lock is not large enough, with SMI in the
> picture.
>
> I suggest that we not uproot the existing AML code or the hotplug
> register block. Instead, I suggest that we add serialization at a higher
> level, with sufficient scope.
>
> QEMU:
>
> - introduce a new flag standing for "CPU plug operation in progress"
>
> - if ICH9_LPC_SMI_F_BROADCAST_BIT has been negotiated:
>
> - "device_add" and "device_del" should enforce
> ICH9_LPC_SMI_F_CPU_HOTPLUG_BIT and
> ICH9_LPC_SMI_F_CPU_HOT_UNPLUG_BIT, respectively
>
> - both device_add and device_del (for VCPUs) should set check the
> "in progress" flag.
>
> - If set, reject the request synchronously
>
> - Otherwise, set the flag, and commence the operation
>
> - in cpu_hotplug_wr(), where we emit the ACPI_DEVICE_OST event with
> qapi_event_send_acpi_device_ost(), clear the "in-progress" flag.
>
> - If QEMU executes the QMP command processing and the cpu_hotplug_wr()
> function on different (host OS) threads, then perhaps we should use an
> atomic type for the flag. (Not sure about locking between QEMU threads,
> sorry.) I don't really expect race conditions, but in case we ever get
> stuck with the flag, we should make sure that the stuck state is "in
> progress", and not "not in progress". (The former state can prevent
> further plug operations, but cannot cause the guest to lose state.)
Furthermore, the "CPU plug operation in progress" flag should be:
- either migrated,
- or a migration blocker.
Because on the destination host, device_add should be possible if and
only if the plug operation completed (either still on the source host,
or on the destination host).
I guess that the "migration blocker" option is easier.
Anyway I assume this is already handled with memory hotplug somehow
(i.e., migration attempt between device_add and ACPI_DEVICE_OST).
Thanks,
Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-14 12:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-10 16:17 [RFC 0/3] x86: fix cpu hotplug with secure boot Igor Mammedov
2020-07-10 16:17 ` [RFC 1/3] x86: lpc9: let firmware negotiate CPU hotplug SMI feature Igor Mammedov
2020-07-14 10:19 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-10 16:17 ` [RFC 2/3] x86: cphp: prevent guest crash on CPU hotplug when broadcast SMI is in use Igor Mammedov
2020-07-14 10:56 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-17 12:57 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-07-20 17:29 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-10 16:17 ` [RFC 3/3] x68: acpi: trigger SMI before scanning for hotplugged CPUs Igor Mammedov
2020-07-14 12:28 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-14 12:41 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2020-07-14 15:19 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-07-15 12:38 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-15 13:43 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-07-16 12:36 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-17 13:13 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-07-20 19:12 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-14 9:58 ` [RFC 0/3] x86: fix cpu hotplug with secure boot Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-14 10:10 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-07-14 18:26 ` Laszlo Ersek
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=b31defc1-a147-3dd3-b1de-b5f7651018b7@redhat.com \
--to=lersek@redhat.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=liran.alon@oracle.com \
--cc=pkrempa@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).