From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 11/15] microcode: unify loading update during CPU resuming and AP wakeup
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 10:16:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190829081645.ee6oecgdiphd6o4a@Air-de-Roger> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190829073747.GB12650@gao-cwp>
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 03:37:47PM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:09:07AM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:44:34AM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 04:10:46PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> >On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:25:24AM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> >> >> Both are loading the cached patch. Since APs call the unified function,
> >> >> microcode_update_one(), during wakeup, the 'start_update' parameter
> >> >> which originally used to distinguish BSP and APs is redundant. So remove
> >> >> this parameter.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >> Note that here is a functional change: resuming a CPU would call
> >> >> ->end_update() now while previously it wasn't. Not quite sure
> >> >> whether it is correct.
> >> >
> >> >I guess that's required if it called start_update prior to calling
> >> >end_update?
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Changes in v9:
> >> >> - return -EOPNOTSUPP rather than 0 if microcode_ops is NULL in
> >> >> microcode_update_one()
> >> >> - rebase and fix conflicts.
> >> >>
> >> >> Changes in v8:
> >> >> - split out from the previous patch
> >> >> ---
> >> >> xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c | 2 +-
> >> >> xen/arch/x86/microcode.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >> >> xen/arch/x86/smpboot.c | 5 +--
> >> >> xen/include/asm-x86/processor.h | 4 +-
> >> >> 4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
> >> >> index 4f21903..24798d5 100644
> >> >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
> >> >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/power.c
> >> >> @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ static int enter_state(u32 state)
> >> >>
> >> >> console_end_sync();
> >> >>
> >> >> - microcode_resume_cpu();
> >> >> + microcode_update_one();
> >> >>
> >> >> if ( !recheck_cpu_features(0) )
> >> >> panic("Missing previously available feature(s)\n");
> >> >> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c b/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
> >> >> index a2febc7..bdd9c9f 100644
> >> >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
> >> >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/microcode.c
> >> >> @@ -203,24 +203,6 @@ static struct microcode_patch *parse_blob(const char *buf, uint32_t len)
> >> >> return NULL;
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> -int microcode_resume_cpu(void)
> >> >> -{
> >> >> - int err;
> >> >> - struct cpu_signature *sig = &this_cpu(cpu_sig);
> >> >> -
> >> >> - if ( !microcode_ops )
> >> >> - return 0;
> >> >> -
> >> >> - spin_lock(µcode_mutex);
> >> >> -
> >> >> - err = microcode_ops->collect_cpu_info(sig);
> >> >> - if ( likely(!err) )
> >> >> - err = microcode_ops->apply_microcode(microcode_cache);
> >> >> - spin_unlock(µcode_mutex);
> >> >> -
> >> >> - return err;
> >> >> -}
> >> >> -
> >> >> void microcode_free_patch(struct microcode_patch *microcode_patch)
> >> >> {
> >> >> microcode_ops->free_patch(microcode_patch->mc);
> >> >> @@ -384,11 +366,29 @@ static int __init microcode_init(void)
> >> >> }
> >> >> __initcall(microcode_init);
> >> >>
> >> >> -int __init early_microcode_update_cpu(bool start_update)
> >> >> +/* Load a cached update to current cpu */
> >> >> +int microcode_update_one(void)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> + int rc;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if ( !microcode_ops )
> >> >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + rc = microcode_update_cpu(NULL);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if ( microcode_ops->end_update )
> >> >> + microcode_ops->end_update();
> >> >
> >> >Don't you need to call start_update before calling
> >> >microcode_update_cpu?
> >>
> >> No. On AMD side, osvw_status records the hardware erratum in the system.
> >> As we don't assume all CPUs have the same erratum, each cpu calls
> >> end_update to update osvw_status after ucode loading.
> >> start_update just resets osvw_status to 0. And it is called once prior
> >> to ucode loading on any CPU so that osvw_status can be recomputed.
> >
> >Oh, I think I understand it. start_update must only be called once
> >_before_ the sequence to update the microcode on all CPUs is
> >performed, while end_update needs to be called on _each_ CPU after the
> >update has been completed in order to account for any erratas.
> >
> >The name for those hooks should be improved, I guess renaming
> >end_update to end_update_each or end_update_percpu would be clearer in
> >order to make it clear that start_update is global, while end_update
> >is percpu. Anyway, I don't want to delay this series for a naming nit.
> >
> >I'm still unsure where start_update is called for the resume from
> >suspension case, I don't seem to see any call to start_update neither
> >in enter_state or microcode_update_one, hence I think this is missing?
>
> No. Actually, no call of start_update for resume case.
>
> >
> >I would expect you need to clean osvw_status also on resume from
> >suspension, in case microcode loading fails? Or else you will be
> >carrying a stale osvw_status.
>
> Then we need to send IPI to all other CPUs to recompute osvw_state.
Why would you need to send an IPI? Aren't other CPUs going to update
the microcode, and hence call end_update?
AFAICT you only need to call start_update after returning from
suspension and before any CPU updates it's microcode. Then osvw_status
will be updated by each CPU as the microcode gets loaded?
> But
> I think it is not necessary. If ucode cache isn't changed during the
> CPU's suspension period, there is not stale osvw bit (assuming OSVW on
> the resuming CPU won't change). If the ucode cache is updated (there
> must be a late ucode loading), osvw_status should have been cleaned
> before late ucode loading.
It could be possible that an ucode that previously loaded fine throw
an error, but I agree that's quite unlikely. Anyway the fix seemed
trivial to me, but maybe I'm missing something.
Thanks, Roger.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-29 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-19 1:25 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 00/15] improve late microcode loading Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 01/15] microcode/intel: extend microcode_update_match() Chao Gao
2019-08-28 15:12 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 7:15 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 7:14 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 02/15] microcode/amd: fix memory leak Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 03/15] microcode/amd: distinguish old and mismatched ucode in microcode_fits() Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 04/15] microcode: introduce a global cache of ucode patch Chao Gao
2019-08-22 11:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-28 15:21 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 10:18 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 05/15] microcode: clean up microcode_resume_cpu Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 06/15] microcode: remove struct ucode_cpu_info Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 07/15] microcode: remove pointless 'cpu' parameter Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 08/15] microcode/amd: call svm_host_osvw_init() in common code Chao Gao
2019-08-22 13:08 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-28 15:26 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 09/15] microcode: pass a patch pointer to apply_microcode() Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 10/15] microcode: split out apply_microcode() from cpu_request_microcode() Chao Gao
2019-08-22 13:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 10:06 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 3:22 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-30 7:25 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 10:19 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 11/15] microcode: unify loading update during CPU resuming and AP wakeup Chao Gao
2019-08-22 14:10 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-22 16:44 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-23 9:09 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 7:37 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 8:16 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
2019-08-29 10:26 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 10:29 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 12/15] microcode: reduce memory allocation and copy when creating a patch Chao Gao
2019-08-23 8:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-26 7:03 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-26 8:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-08-29 10:47 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 13/15] x86/microcode: Synchronize late microcode loading Chao Gao
2019-08-19 10:27 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-19 14:49 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-29 12:06 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 3:30 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 14/15] microcode: remove microcode_update_lock Chao Gao
2019-08-19 1:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 15/15] microcode: block #NMI handling when loading an ucode Chao Gao
2019-08-23 8:46 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-26 8:07 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-27 4:52 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-28 8:52 ` Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-29 12:11 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 6:35 ` Chao Gao
2019-09-09 5:52 ` Chao Gao
2019-09-09 6:16 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-29 12:22 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-30 6:33 ` Chao Gao
2019-08-30 7:30 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-22 7:51 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 00/15] improve late microcode loading Sergey Dyasli
2019-08-22 15:39 ` Chao Gao
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=20190829081645.ee6oecgdiphd6o4a@Air-de-Roger \
--to=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).