Re: xen/evtchn: Interrupt for port 34, but apparently not enabled; per-user 00000000a86a4c1b on 5.10

[Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>]

Hi Juergen,

On 15/12/2020 10:20, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 15.12.20 08:27, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 14.12.20 22:25, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> Hi Juergen,
>>>
>>> When testing Linux 5.10 dom0, I could reliably hit the following 
>>> warning with using event 2L ABI:
>>>
>>> [  589.591737] Interrupt for port 34, but apparently not enabled; 
>>> per-user 00000000a86a4c1b
>>> [  589.593259] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1111 at 
>>> /home/ANT.AMAZON.COM/jgrall/works/oss/linux/drivers/xen/evtchn.c:170 
>>> evtchn_interrupt+0xeb/0x100
>>> [  589.595514] Modules linked in:
>>> [  589.596145] CPU: 0 PID: 1111 Comm: qemu-system-i38 Tainted: G 
>>> W         5.10.0+ #180
>>> [  589.597708] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), 
>>> BIOS rel-1.12.0-59-gc9ba5276e321-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
>>> [  589.599782] RIP: e030:evtchn_interrupt+0xeb/0x100
>>> [  589.600698] Code: 48 8d bb d8 01 00 00 ba 01 00 00 00 be 1d 00 00 
>>> 00 e8 d9 10 ca ff eb b2 8b 75 20 48 89 da 48 c7 c7 a8 31 3d 82 e8 65 
>>> 29 a0 ff <0f> 0b e9 42 ff ff ff 0f 1f 40 00 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 
>>> 00 00 0f
>>> [  589.604087] RSP: e02b:ffffc90040003e70 EFLAGS: 00010086
>>> [  589.605102] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff888102091800 RCX: 
>>> 0000000000000027
>>> [  589.606445] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffff88817fe19150 RDI: 
>>> ffff88817fe19158
>>> [  589.607790] RBP: ffff88810f5ab980 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 
>>> 0000000000328980
>>> [  589.609134] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffffc90040003c70 R12: 
>>> ffff888107fd3c00
>>> [  589.610484] R13: ffffc90040003ed4 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 
>>> ffff88810f5ffd80
>>> [  589.611828] FS:  00007f960c4b8ac0(0000) GS:ffff88817fe00000(0000) 
>>> knlGS:0000000000000000
>>> [  589.613348] CS:  10000e030 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>> [  589.614525] CR2: 00007f17ee72e000 CR3: 000000010f5b6000 CR4: 
>>> 0000000000050660
>>> [  589.615874] Call Trace:
>>> [  589.616402]  <IRQ>
>>> [  589.616855]  __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x4e/0x2c0
>>> [  589.617784]  handle_irq_event_percpu+0x30/0x80
>>> [  589.618660]  handle_irq_event+0x3a/0x60
>>> [  589.619428]  handle_edge_irq+0x9b/0x1f0
>>> [  589.620209]  generic_handle_irq+0x4f/0x60
>>> [  589.621008]  evtchn_2l_handle_events+0x160/0x280
>>> [  589.621913]  __xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x66/0xb0
>>> [  589.622767]  __xen_pv_evtchn_do_upcall+0x11/0x20
>>> [  589.623665]  asm_call_irq_on_stack+0x12/0x20
>>> [  589.624511]  </IRQ>
>>> [  589.624978]  xen_pv_evtchn_do_upcall+0x77/0xf0
>>> [  589.625848]  exc_xen_hypervisor_callback+0x8/0x10
>>>
>>> This can be reproduced when creating/destroying guest in a loop. 
>>> Although, I have struggled to reproduce it on a vanilla Xen.
>>>
>>> After several hours of debugging, I think I have found the root cause.
>>>
>>> While we only expect the unmask to happen when the event channel is 
>>> EOIed, there is an unmask happening as part of handle_edge_irq() 
>>> because the interrupt was seen as pending by another vCPU 
>>> (IRQS_PENDING is set).
>>>
>>> It turns out that the event channel is set for multiple vCPU is in 
>>> cpu_evtchn_mask. This is happening because the affinity is not 
>>> cleared when freeing an event channel.
>>>
>>> The implementation of evtchn_2l_handle_events() will look for all the 
>>> active interrupts for the current vCPU and later on clear the pending 
>>> bit (via the ack() callback). IOW, I believe, this is not an atomic 
>>> operation.
>>>
>>> Even if Xen will notify the event to a single vCPU, 
>>> evtchn_pending_sel may still be set on the other vCPU (thanks to a 
>>> different event channel). Therefore, there is a chance that two vCPUs 
>>> will try to handle the same interrupt.
>>>
>>> The IRQ handler handle_edge_irq() is able to deal with that and will 
>>> mask/unmask the interrupt. This will mess us with the lateeoi logic 
>>> (although, I managed to reproduce it once without XSA-332).
>>
>> Thanks for the analysis!
>>
>>> My initial idea to fix the problem was to switch the affinity from 
>>> CPU X to CPU0 when the event channel is freed.
>>>
>>> However, I am not sure this is enough because I haven't found 
>>> anything yet preventing a race between evtchn_2l_handle_events9) and 
>>> evtchn_2l_bind_vcpu().
>>>
>>> So maybe we want to introduce a refcounting (if there is nothing 
>>> provided by the IRQ framework) and only unmask when the counter drop 
>>> to 0.
>>>
>>> Any opinions?
>>
>> I think we don't need a refcount, but just the internal states "masked"
>> and "eoi_pending" and unmask only if both are false. "masked" will be
>> set when the event is being masked. When delivering a lateeoi irq
>> "eoi_pending" will be set and "masked "reset. "masked" will be reset
>> when a normal unmask is happening. And "eoi_pending" will be reset
>> when a lateeoi is signaled. Any reset of "masked" and "eoi_pending"
>> will check the other flag and do an unmask if both are false.
>>
>> I'll write a patch.
> 
> Julien, could you please test the attached (only build tested) patch?

Thank you writing the patches. I will aim to give a spin next week.

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall