[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 1/6] xen/x86: Add initial x2APIC ID to the per-vLAPIC save area
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 05:20:35PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 03:38:29PM +0000, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > > This allows the initial x2APIC ID to be sent on the migration stream. The > > hardcoded mapping x2apic_id=2*vcpu_id is maintained for the time being. > > Given the vlapic data is zero-extended on restore, fix up migrations from > > hosts without the field by setting it to the old convention if zero. > > > > x2APIC IDs are calculated from the CPU policy where the guest topology is > > defined. For the time being, the function simply returns the old > > relationship, but will eventually return results consistent with the > > topology. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > xen/arch/x86/cpuid.c | 20 ++++--------------- > > xen/arch/x86/domain.c | 3 +++ > > xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vlapic.h | 2 ++ > > xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h | 2 ++ > > xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h | 9 +++++++++ > > xen/lib/x86/policy.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > 7 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpuid.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpuid.c > > index 7290a979c6..6e259785d0 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpuid.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpuid.c > > @@ -139,10 +139,9 @@ void guest_cpuid(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t leaf, > > const struct cpu_user_regs *regs; > > > > case 0x1: > > - /* TODO: Rework topology logic. */ > > res->b &= 0x00ffffffu; > > if ( is_hvm_domain(d) ) > > - res->b |= (v->vcpu_id * 2) << 24; > > + res->b |= SET_xAPIC_ID(vlapic_x2apic_id(vcpu_vlapic(v))); > > SET_xAPIC_ID() was intended to be used with the APIC_ID register, > which also shifts the ID. Not sure it's logically correct to use > here, even if functionally equivalent (as is shifts left by 24). > > > > > /* TODO: Rework vPMU control in terms of toolstack choices. */ > > if ( vpmu_available(v) && > > @@ -311,20 +310,9 @@ void guest_cpuid(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t leaf, > > break; > > > > case 0xb: > > - /* > > - * In principle, this leaf is Intel-only. In practice, it is > > tightly > > - * coupled with x2apic, and we offer an x2apic-capable APIC > > emulation > > - * to guests on AMD hardware as well. > > - * > > - * TODO: Rework topology logic. > > - */ > > - if ( p->basic.x2apic ) > > - { > > - *(uint8_t *)&res->c = subleaf; > > - > > - /* Fix the x2APIC identifier. */ > > - res->d = v->vcpu_id * 2; > > - } > > + /* ecx != 0 if the subleaf is implemented */ > > + if ( res->c && p->basic.x2apic ) > > + res->d = vlapic_x2apic_id(vcpu_vlapic(v)); > > This needs to be protected so it's reachable by HVM guests only, > otherwise you will dereference v->arch.hvm.vlapic on a PV vCPU if it > happens to have p->basic.x2apic set. > > Why not just return the x2apic_id field from the cpu_policy object? > (topo.subleaf[X].x2apic_id) Scratch that, the cpu policy is per-domain, not per-vcpu, and hence cannot hold the x{,2}apic IDs. > Also, I'm not sure I get why the setting of res->d is gated on res->c > != 0, won't res->c be 0 when the guest %ecx is 0, yet %edx must be > valid for all %ecx inputs, the SDM states: > > "The EDX output of leaf 0BH is always valid and does not vary with > input value in ECX." > > I think you need to keep the previous logic that doesn't gate setting > ->d on anything other than p->basic.x2apic. > > > break; > > > > case XSTATE_CPUID: > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > > index 8a31d18f69..e0c7ed8d5d 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > > @@ -288,7 +288,10 @@ void update_guest_memory_policy(struct vcpu *v, > > static void cpu_policy_updated(struct vcpu *v) > > { > > if ( is_hvm_vcpu(v) ) > > + { > > hvm_cpuid_policy_changed(v); > > + vlapic_cpu_policy_changed(v); > > + } > > } > > > > void domain_cpu_policy_changed(struct domain *d) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c > > index cdb69d9742..f500d66543 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c > > @@ -1069,7 +1069,7 @@ static uint32_t x2apic_ldr_from_id(uint32_t id) > > static void set_x2apic_id(struct vlapic *vlapic) > > { > > const struct vcpu *v = vlapic_vcpu(vlapic); > > - uint32_t apic_id = v->vcpu_id * 2; > > + uint32_t apic_id = vlapic->hw.x2apic_id; > > uint32_t apic_ldr = x2apic_ldr_from_id(apic_id); > > > > /* > > @@ -1083,6 +1083,22 @@ static void set_x2apic_id(struct vlapic *vlapic) > > vlapic_set_reg(vlapic, APIC_LDR, apic_ldr); > > } > > > > +void vlapic_cpu_policy_changed(struct vcpu *v) > > +{ > > + struct vlapic *vlapic = vcpu_vlapic(v); > > + struct cpu_policy *cp = v->domain->arch.cpu_policy; > > + > > + /* > > + * Don't override the initial x2APIC ID if we have migrated it or > > + * if the domain doesn't have vLAPIC at all. > > + */ > > + if ( !has_vlapic(v->domain) || vlapic->loaded.hw ) > > + return; > > + > > + vlapic->hw.x2apic_id = x86_x2apic_id_from_vcpu_id(cp, v->vcpu_id); > > + vlapic_set_reg(vlapic, APIC_ID, SET_xAPIC_ID(vlapic->hw.x2apic_id)); > > +} > > + > > int guest_wrmsr_apic_base(struct vcpu *v, uint64_t val) > > { > > const struct cpu_policy *cp = v->domain->arch.cpu_policy; > > @@ -1449,7 +1465,7 @@ void vlapic_reset(struct vlapic *vlapic) > > if ( v->vcpu_id == 0 ) > > vlapic->hw.apic_base_msr |= APIC_BASE_BSP; > > > > - vlapic_set_reg(vlapic, APIC_ID, (v->vcpu_id * 2) << 24); > > + vlapic_set_reg(vlapic, APIC_ID, SET_xAPIC_ID(vlapic->hw.x2apic_id)); > > vlapic_do_init(vlapic); > > } > > > > @@ -1514,6 +1530,13 @@ static void lapic_load_fixup(struct vlapic *vlapic) > > const struct vcpu *v = vlapic_vcpu(vlapic); > > uint32_t good_ldr = x2apic_ldr_from_id(vlapic->loaded.id); > > > > + /* > > + * Guest with hardcoded assumptions about x2apic_id <-> vcpu_id > > + * mappings. Recreate the mapping it used to have in old host. > > Wouldn't it be more appropriate to state "Loading record without > hw.x2apic_id in the save stream, calculate using the vcpu_id * 2 > relation" or some such. > > Current comment makes it looks like the guest has some kind of > restriction with this relation, but that's just an internal Xen > limitation. > > > + */ > > + if ( !vlapic->hw.x2apic_id ) > > + vlapic->hw.x2apic_id = v->vcpu_id * 2; > > + > > /* Skip fixups on xAPIC mode, or if the x2APIC LDR is already correct > > */ > > if ( !vlapic_x2apic_mode(vlapic) || > > (vlapic->loaded.ldr == good_ldr) ) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vlapic.h > > b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vlapic.h > > index 88ef945243..e8d41313ab 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vlapic.h > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vlapic.h > > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ > > #define vlapic_xapic_mode(vlapic) \ > > (!vlapic_hw_disabled(vlapic) && \ > > !((vlapic)->hw.apic_base_msr & APIC_BASE_EXTD)) > > +#define vlapic_x2apic_id(vlapic) ((vlapic)->hw.x2apic_id) > > > > /* > > * Generic APIC bitmap vector update & search routines. > > @@ -107,6 +108,7 @@ int vlapic_ack_pending_irq(struct vcpu *v, int vector, > > bool force_ack); > > > > int vlapic_init(struct vcpu *v); > > void vlapic_destroy(struct vcpu *v); > > +void vlapic_cpu_policy_changed(struct vcpu *v); > > > > void vlapic_reset(struct vlapic *vlapic); > > > > diff --git a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h > > b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h > > index 7ecacadde1..1c2ec669ff 100644 > > --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h > > +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h > > @@ -394,6 +394,8 @@ struct hvm_hw_lapic { > > uint32_t disabled; /* VLAPIC_xx_DISABLED */ > > uint32_t timer_divisor; > > uint64_t tdt_msr; > > + uint32_t x2apic_id; > > + uint32_t rsvd_zero; > > Do we really to add a new field, couldn't we get the lapic IDs from > the cpu_policy? Since getting from the cpu_policy is not possible, what about getting it from the registers itself? It's already present in hvm_hw_lapic_regs. Regards, Roger.
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |