[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] x86/nvmx: clarify and fix usage of nvmx_update_apicv
> From: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2020 5:51 PM > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:03:28AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > From: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2020 3:08 AM > > > > > > The current usage of nvmx_update_apicv is not clear: it is deeply > > > intertwined with the Ack interrupt on exit VMEXIT control. > > > > > > The code in nvmx_update_apicv should update the SVI (in service > interrupt) > > > field of the guest interrupt status only when the Ack interrupt on > > > exit is set, as it is used to record that the interrupt being > > > serviced is signaled in a vmcs field, and hence hasn't been injected > > > as on native. It's important to record the current in service > > > interrupt on the guest interrupt status field, or else further > > > interrupts won't respect the priority of the in service one. > > > > > > While clarifying the usage make sure that the SVI is only updated when > > > Ack on exit is set and the nested vmcs interrupt info field is valid. Or > > > else a guest not using the Ack on exit feature would loose interrupts as > > > they would be signaled as being in service on the guest interrupt > > > status field but won't actually be recorded on the interrupt info vmcs > > > field, neither injected in any other way. > > > > It is insufficient. You also need to update RVI to enable virtual injection > > when Ack on exit is cleared. > > But RVI should be updated in vmx_intr_assist in that case, since > nvmx_intr_intercept shouldn't intercept the interrupt, as it should be > handled normally. As we discussed before, vmx_intr_assist is invoked before nvmx_switch_guest. It is incorrectly to update RVI at that time since it might be still vmcs02 being active (if no pending softirq to make it invoked again). Also nvmx_intr_intercept does intercept Ack-on-exit=0 case: if ( intack.source == hvm_intsrc_pic || intack.source == hvm_intsrc_lapic ) { vmx_inject_extint(intack.vector, intack.source); ctrl = get_vvmcs(v, VM_EXIT_CONTROLS); if ( ctrl & VM_EXIT_ACK_INTR_ON_EXIT ) { /* for now, duplicate the ack path in vmx_intr_assist */ hvm_vcpu_ack_pending_irq(v, intack); pt_intr_post(v, intack); intack = hvm_vcpu_has_pending_irq(v); if ( unlikely(intack.source != hvm_intsrc_none) ) vmx_enable_intr_window(v, intack); } else if ( !cpu_has_vmx_virtual_intr_delivery ) vmx_enable_intr_window(v, intack); return 1; <<<<<<<< } > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c | 11 ++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c > b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c > > > index 1b8461ba30..180d01e385 100644 > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c > > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c > > > @@ -1383,7 +1383,7 @@ static void (struct vcpu *v) > > > { > > > struct nestedvmx *nvmx = &vcpu_2_nvmx(v); > > > unsigned long reason = get_vvmcs(v, VM_EXIT_REASON); > > > - uint32_t intr_info = nvmx->intr.intr_info; > > > + unsigned long intr_info = get_vvmcs(v, VM_EXIT_INTR_INFO); > > > > well, above reminds me an interesting question. Combining last and this > > patch, we'd see essentially that it goes back to the state before f96e1469 > > (at least when Ack on exit is true). > > Well, patch 1/3 is a revert of f96e1469, so just reverting f96e1469 > gets us to that state. you are right. I just wanted to point out that this patch alone doesn't do any real fix for ack-on-exit=1 case. It just makes sure that ack-on-exit=0 is skipped from that function. So it won't be the one fixing your previous problem. 😊 > > This patch is an attempt to clarify that nvmx_update_apicv is closely > related to the Ack on exit feature, as it modifies SVI in order to > signal the vector currently being serviced by the EXIT_INTR_INFO vmcs > field. This was not obvious to me, as at first sight I assumed > nvmx_update_apicv was actually injecting that vector into the guest. > > > iirc, that commit was introduced to enable > > nested x2apic with apicv, and your very first version even just removed > > the whole nvmx_update_apicv. Then now with the new reverted logic, > > are you still suffering x2apic problem? If not, does it imply the real fix > > is actually coming from patch 3/3 for eoi bitmap update? > > Yes, patch 3/3 is the one that fixed the issue. Note however that > strangely enough removing the call to nvmx_update_apicv (as my first > attempt to solve the issue) did fix it on one of my boxes. It depends > a lot on the available vmx features AFAICT. Did you confirm that with 3/3 alone can fix that issue? Just want to make sure the real gain of each patch, so we can reflect it in the commit msg in updated version. > > > > > > > if ( reason == EXIT_REASON_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT && > > > nvmx->intr.source == hvm_intsrc_lapic && > > > @@ -1399,6 +1399,15 @@ static void nvmx_update_apicv(struct vcpu *v) > > > ppr = vlapic_set_ppr(vlapic); > > > WARN_ON((ppr & 0xf0) != (vector & 0xf0)); > > > > > > + /* > > > + * SVI must be updated when the interrupt has been signaled using > the > > > + * Ack on exit feature, or else the currently in-service > > > interrupt > > > + * won't be respected. > > > + * > > > + * Note that this is specific to the fact that when doing a > > > VMEXIT an > > > + * interrupt might get delivered using the interrupt info vmcs > > > field > > > + * instead of being injected normally. > > > + */ > > > > I'm not sure mentioning SVI specifically here is necessary, since all steps > > here are required - updating iir, isr, rvi, svi, ppr, etc. It is just an > > emulation > > of updating virtual APIC state as if a virtual interrupt delivery happens. > > Hm, it was hard for me to figure out that SVI is modified here in > order to signal that the Ack on exit vector is currently in service, > as opposed to being injected using the virtual interrupt delivery > mechanism. > > I just wanted to clarify that the purpose of this function is not to > inject the vector in intr_info, but rather to signal that such vector > has already been injected using a different mechanism. > > I'm happy to reword this, but IMO it should be clear that the purpose > of the function is not so much to inject an interrupt, but to update > the virtual interrupt delivery field in order to signal that an > interrupt has been injected using a different mechanism. > reading it again I feel possibly fine to put the comment there. But I disagree the statement above. The purpose of this function is indeed for injecting an interrupt. Both RVI and SVI are additional requirements when virtual APIC page is in-use while virtual interrupt delivery is not used, i.e. when ack-on-exit is set. Thanks Kevin
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |