From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ed White Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] Alternate p2m: support multiple copies of host p2m Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 09:38:53 -0700 Message-ID: <558C2E9D.3010304@intel.com> References: <1434999372-3688-1-git-send-email-edmund.h.white@intel.com> <558A4297.9090806@bitdefender.com> <558AB2B3.4030106@bitdefender.com> <558ADE4D.9060303@intel.com> <558B28FE.5060803@intel.com> <558B3563.9070402@intel.com> <558BC313.6060305@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <558BC313.6060305@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Andrew Cooper , "Lengyel, Tamas" Cc: Ravi Sahita , Wei Liu , Razvan Cojocaru , Tim Deegan , Ian Jackson , Xen-devel , Jan Beulich , Daniel De Graaf List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/25/2015 02:00 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 24/06/15 23:55, Ed White wrote: >> On 06/24/2015 03:45 PM, Lengyel, Tamas wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Ed White wrote: >>> >>>> On 06/24/2015 02:34 PM, Lengyel, Tamas wrote: >>>>> Hi Ed, >>>>> I tried the system using memsharing and I collected the following crash >>>>> log. In this test I ran memsharing on all pages of the domain before >>>>> activating altp2m and creating the view. Afterwards I used my updated >>>>> xen-access to create a copy of this p2m with only R/X permissions. The >>>> idea >>>>> would be that the altp2m view remains completely shared, while the >>>> hostp2m >>>>> would be able to do its CoW propagation as the domain is executing. >>>>> >>>>> (XEN) mm locking order violation: 278 > 239 >>>>> (XEN) Xen BUG at mm-locks.h:68 >>>>> (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.6-unstable x86_64 debug=y Tainted: C ]---- >>>>> (XEN) CPU: 2 >>>>> (XEN) RIP: e008:[] >>>>> p2m_altp2m_propagate_change+0x85/0x4a9 >>>>> (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010282 CONTEXT: hypervisor (d6v0) >>>>> (XEN) rax: 0000000000000000 rbx: 0000000000000000 rcx: >>>> 0000000000000000 >>>>> (XEN) rdx: ffff8302163a8000 rsi: 000000000000000a rdi: >>>> ffff82d0802a069c >>>>> (XEN) rbp: ffff8302163afa68 rsp: ffff8302163af9e8 r8: >>>> ffff83021c000000 >>>>> (XEN) r9: 0000000000000003 r10: 00000000000000ef r11: >>>> 0000000000000003 >>>>> (XEN) r12: ffff83010cc51820 r13: 0000000000000000 r14: >>>> ffff830158d90000 >>>>> (XEN) r15: 0000000000025697 cr0: 0000000080050033 cr4: >>>> 00000000001526f0 >>>>> (XEN) cr3: 00000000dbba3000 cr2: 00000000778c9714 >>>>> (XEN) ds: 0000 es: 0000 fs: 0000 gs: 0000 ss: 0000 cs: e008 >>>>> (XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff8302163af9e8: >>>>> (XEN) ffff8302163af9f8 00000000803180f8 000000000000000c >>>> ffff82d0801892ee >>>>> (XEN) ffff82d0801fb4d1 ffff83010cc51de0 000000000008ff49 >>>> ffff82d08012f86a >>>>> (XEN) ffff83010cc51820 ffff83010cc51820 0000000000000000 >>>> 0000000000000000 >>>>> (XEN) ffff83010cc51820 0000000000000000 ffff8300dbb334b8 >>>> ffff8302163afa00 >>>>> (XEN) ffff8302163afb18 ffff82d0801fd549 0000000500000009 >>>> ffff830200000001 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000000001 ffff830158d90000 0000000000000002 >>>> 000000000008ff49 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000025697 000000000000000c ffff8302163afae8 >>>> 80c000008ff49175 >>>>> (XEN) 80c00000d0a97175 01ff83010cc51820 0000000000000097 >>>> ffff8300dbb33000 >>>>> (XEN) ffff8302163afb78 000000000008ff49 0000000000000000 >>>> 0000000000000001 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000025697 ffff83010cc51820 ffff8302163afb38 >>>> ffff82d0801fd644 >>>>> (XEN) ffffffffffffffff 00000000000d0a97 ffff8302163afb98 >>>> ffff82d0801f23c5 >>>>> (XEN) ffff830158d90000 000000000cc51820 ffff830158d90000 >>>> 000000000000000c >>>>> (XEN) 000000000008ff49 ffff83010cc51820 0000000000025697 >>>> 00000000000d0a97 >>>>> (XEN) 000000000008ff49 ffff830158d90000 ffff8302163afbd8 >>>> ffff82d0801f45c8 >>>>> (XEN) ffff83010cc51820 000000000000000c ffff83008fd41170 >>>> 000000000008ff49 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000025697 ffff82e001a152e0 ffff8302163afc58 >>>> ffff82d080205b51 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000000009 000000000008ff49 ffff8300d0a97000 >>>> ffff83008fd41160 >>>>> (XEN) ffff82e001a152f0 ffff82e0011fe920 ffff83010cc51820 >>>> 0000000c00000000 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000025697 0000000000000003 ffff83010cc51820 >>>> ffff8302163afd34 >>>>> (XEN) 0000000000025697 0000000000000000 ffff8302163afca8 >>>> ffff82d0801f1f7d >>>>> (XEN) Xen call trace: >>>>> (XEN) [] p2m_altp2m_propagate_change+0x85/0x4a9 >>>>> (XEN) [] ept_set_entry_sve+0x5fa/0x6e6 >>>>> (XEN) [] ept_set_entry+0xf/0x11 >>>>> (XEN) [] p2m_set_entry+0xd4/0x112 >>>>> (XEN) [] set_shared_p2m_entry+0x2d0/0x39b >>>>> (XEN) [] __mem_sharing_unshare_page+0x83f/0xbd6 >>>>> (XEN) [] __get_gfn_type_access+0x224/0x2b0 >>>>> (XEN) [] hvm_hap_nested_page_fault+0x21f/0x795 >>>>> (XEN) [] vmx_vmexit_handler+0x1764/0x1af3 >>>>> (XEN) [] vmx_asm_vmexit_handler+0x41/0xc0 >>>> The crash here is because I haven't successfully forced all the shared >>>> pages in the host p2m to become unshared before copying, >>>> which is the intended behaviour. >>>> >>>> I think I know how that has happened and how to fix it, but what you're >>>> trying to do won't work by design. By the time a copy from host p2m to >>>> altp2m occurs, the sharing is supposed to be broken. >>>> >>> Hm. If the sharing gets broken before the hostp2m->altp2m copy, maybe doing >>> sharing after the view has been created is a better route? I guess the >>> sharing code would need to be adapted to check if altp2m is enabled for >>> that to work.. >>> >>> >>>> You're coming up with some ways of attempting to use altp2m that we >>>> hadn't thought of. That's a good thing, and just what we want, but >>>> there are limits to what we can support without more far-reaching >>>> changes to existing parts of Xen. This isn't going to be do-able for >>>> 4.6. >>>> >>> My main concern is just getting it to work, hitting 4.6 is not a priority. >>> I understand that my stuff is highly experimental ;) While the gfn >>> remapping feature is intriguing, in my setup I already have a copy of the >>> page I would want to present during a singlestep-altp2mswitch - in the >>> origin domains memory. AFAIU the gfn remapping would work only within the >>> domains existing p2m space. >> Understood, but for us hitting 4.6 with the initial version of altp2m >> is *the* priority. And yes, remapping is restricted to pages from the >> same host p2m. > > It is fine for experimental features to have known interaction issues. > I don't necessarily see this as a blocker to 4.6, although it would > indeed be better if it could be fixed in time. I plan to fix the bug, such that unshare will always occur before a copy. I don't plan to make the altp2m's able to have shared pages. Ed