[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/arm: vcpu: Correctly release resource when the VCPU failed to initialized
On 05/02/2014 04:27 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 16:15 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 15:17 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 02/05/14 15:09, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 05/02/2014 01:25 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 20:15 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>>> While I was adding new failing code at the end of the function, I've >>>>>> noticed >>>>>> that the vtimers are not freed which mess all the timers and will crash >>>>>> Xen >>>>>> quickly when the page will be reused. >>>>>> >>>>>> Currently neither vcpu_vgic_init nor vcpu_vtimer_init fail, so we >>>>>> are safe for now. With the new GICv3 code, the former function will be >>>>>> able >>>>>> to fail. This will result to a memory leak. >>>>>> >>>>>> Call vcpu_destroy if the initialization has failed. We also need to add a >>>>>> boolean to know if the vtimers are correctly setup as the timer common >>>>>> code >>>>>> doesn't have safe guard against removing non-initialized timer. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> I was about to acked + apply but it failed to build on arm64 with: >>>>> >>>>> domain.c: In function 'alloc_vcpu_struct': >>>>> >>>>> /local/scratch/ianc/devel/committer.git/xen/include/xen/lib.h:19:31: >>>>> error: static assertion failed: "!(sizeof(*v) > PAGE_SIZE)" >>>>> #define BUILD_BUG_ON(cond) ({ _Static_assert(!(cond), "!(" #cond >>>>> ")"); }) >>>>> ^ >>>>> domain.c:415:5: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_BUG_ON' >>>>> BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*v) > PAGE_SIZE); >>>>> ^ >>>>> struct arch_vcpu is apparently now too large. >>>> Hmmm... I'm not sure what is the best solution. Can: >>>> 1) Allocate 2 pages for the VCPU structure >>>> 2) Allocate vgic structure outside. >>>> >>>> Any opinions? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>> >>> 2) >>> >>> The reason structs vcpu/domain were reduced to this size to was avoid >>> needing multi-page allocations, which risk allocation failures on >>> systems with sufficiently fragmented memory. >> >> Ack. #2 (with s/vgic/anything suitably self contained/) is the answer. > > Was Vijay not moving the vgtic stuff out in one of the gicv3 patches? (CC him) IIRC, he only moves the private_irqs field. I think we should move the whole structure, to give more space for the future. This patch will be necessary for the GICv3 serie has vcpu_vgic_init will be able to fail (see patch #10). Ideally, for bisection purpose, it should be applied before the patch #10. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |