LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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 \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 6/6] svm: Temporary deactivate AVIC during ExtINT handling' \
    /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

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).