From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Wanpeng Li" <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Yunhong Jiang" <yunhong.jiang@intel.com>,
"Jan Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
"Haozhong Zhang" <haozhong.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] KVM: nVMX: Fix preemption timer bit set in vmcs02 even if L1 doesn't enable it
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 12:18:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c360513-3ac7-3139-6614-45dfdff9646b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANRm+CwrBXGgeuo3MueoM5odJ9UXm5mFNuBMO-0ap4dqx6jtyA@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/07/2016 02:38, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-07-07 22:11 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>:
>>
>>
>> On 07/07/2016 15:23, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (kvm_lapic_hv_timer_in_use(vcpu) &&
>>>>>>> + (is_guest_mode(vcpu) ||
>>>>>>> kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer(vcpu,
>>>>>>> - kvm_get_lapic_tscdeadline_msr(vcpu)))
>>>>>>> + kvm_get_lapic_tscdeadline_msr(vcpu))))
>>>>>>> kvm_lapic_switch_to_sw_timer(vcpu);
>>>>>>> if (check_tsc_unstable()) {
>>>>>>> u64 offset = kvm_compute_tsc_offset(vcpu,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, this is good as a fallback. I'll try to fix it by getting the
>>>>> pin-based execution controls right but if I fail this patch is okay.
>>> I believe we still need this patch even if you implement "L1 TSC
>>> deadline timer to trigger while L2 is running" eventually, the codes
>>> you posted before:
>>>
>>> exec_control = vmcs12->pin_based_vm_exec_control;
>>> +exec_control &= ~PIN_BASED_VMX_PREEMPTION_TIMER;
>>> exec_control |= vmcs_config.pin_based_exec_ctrl;
>>> - exec_control &= ~PIN_BASED_VMX_PREEMPTION_TIMER;
>>> + if (vmx->hv_deadline_tsc == -1)
>>> + exec_control &= ~PIN_BASED_VMX_PREEMPTION_TIMER;
>>>
>>> So there is still case the preemption timer bit of vmcs02 is not set,
>>> however, the scenario I mentioned above in kvm_arch_vcpu_load() will
>>> set it unnecessary.
>>
>> kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer _will_ set the preemption timer bit of vmcs02
>> if vmcs02 is the loaded one.
>>
>> This can happen if L2 has access to L1's local APIC registers (i.e. L1
>> passes the local APIC instead of emulating it, as is the case in a
>> partitioning hypervisor). While L2 runs, it writes to the TSC deadline
>> MSR of L1. This causes a call to kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer while the
>> active VMCS is a vmcs02.
>
> Yes, in the scenario you pointed out the call to
> kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer while the active VMCS is vmcs02 is correct,
> however, in the scenario I mentioned in the patch description is not
> correct even if enable "L1 TSC deadline timer to trigger while L2 is
> running".
It doesn't help that you have not explained how to reproduce the
bug---this is what the cover letter and commit messages are for, too.
Your patch 1 is enough for me to boot L2 Windows 2008 inside L1 KVM 4.1.
So I have an updated patch to handle the TSC deadline timer while L2 is
running, but I have no idea how to test its correctness. I'll send the
patch shortly.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-08 10:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-07 12:18 [PATCH v4 1/2] KVM: nVMX: Fix incorrect preemption timer vmexit in nested guest Wanpeng Li
2016-07-07 12:18 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] KVM: nVMX: Fix preemption timer bit set in vmcs02 even if L1 doesn't enable it Wanpeng Li
2016-07-07 12:29 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-07 13:23 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-07-07 14:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-08 0:38 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-07-08 10:18 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2016-07-08 13:58 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-07-08 14:08 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-07-08 15:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-08 22:57 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-07-07 12:29 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] KVM: nVMX: Fix incorrect preemption timer vmexit in nested guest Paolo Bonzini
2016-07-07 22:12 ` yunhong jiang
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=2c360513-3ac7-3139-6614-45dfdff9646b@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=haozhong.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.com \
--cc=yunhong.jiang@intel.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®