Re: [PATCH] arm/arm64: KVM: send SIGBUS error to qemu

[gengdongjiu <gengdongjiu@huawei.com>]

Hi James,
   thanks for your review.

On 2017/3/23 23:06, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Dongjiu Geng,
> 
> On 23/03/17 13:01, Dongjiu Geng wrote:
>> when the pfn is KVM_PFN_ERR_HWPOISON, it indicates to send
>> SIGBUS signal from KVM's fault-handling code to qemu, qemu
>> can handle this signal according to the fault address.
> 
> I'm afraid I beat you to it on this one:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg568919.html
> 
> (Are you the same gengdj who ask me to post that patch?:
>  https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/5/187 )

Oh, yes, it is me. recently I do not check my gmail and think you are not reply mail.
it is great that you upstream this patch.

> 
> We don't need upstream KVM to do this until either arm or arm64 has
> ARCH_SUPPORTS_MEMORY_FAILURE. Punit and Tyler have discovered problems with the
> way arm64's hugepage and hwpoison interact:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg568995.html
  ok, thanks James. do you know when the arm or arm64 will have ARCH_SUPPORTS_MEMORY_FAILURE?
> 
> 
> Some comments on the differences:
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> index 962616fd4ddd..1307ec400de3 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -1237,6 +1237,20 @@ static void coherent_cache_guest_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, kvm_pfn_t pfn,
>>  	__coherent_cache_guest_page(vcpu, pfn, size);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void kvm_send_hwpoison_signal(unsigned long address,
>> +					struct task_struct *tsk)
>> +{
>> +	siginfo_t info;
>> +
>> +	info.si_signo	= SIGBUS;
>> +	info.si_errno	= 0;
>> +	info.si_code	= BUS_MCEERR_AR;
>> +	info.si_addr	= (void __user *)address;
>> +	info.si_addr_lsb = PAGE_SHIFT;
> 
> Any version of this patch should handle hugepage for the sizes KVM uses in its
> stage2 mappings. By just passing PAGE_SHIFT you let the guest fault for each
> page that makes up the hugepage.
> 
> 
>> +
>> +	send_sig_info(SIGBUS, &info, tsk);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
>>  			  struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot, unsigned long hva,
>>  			  unsigned long fault_status)
>> @@ -1309,6 +1323,12 @@ static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
>>  	if (is_error_noslot_pfn(pfn))
>>  		return -EFAULT;
>>  
>> +	if (is_error_hwpoison_pfn(pfn)) {
>> +		kvm_send_hwpoison_signal(kvm_vcpu_gfn_to_hva(vcpu, gfn),
>> +								current);
>> +		return -EFAULT;
> 
> This will return -EFAULT from the KVM_RUN ioctl(). Is Qemu expected to know it
> should try again? This is indistinguishable from the is_error_noslot_pfn() error
> above.
> 
> x86 returns 0 from this path, kvm_handle_bad_page() in arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c as the
> SIGBUS should arrive first. If the SIGBUS is handled the error has been resolved
> and Qemu can call KVM_RUN again. Returning an error and sending SIGBUS suggests
> there are two problems.
  thanks for that. I think your Statement is reasonable.
> 
> 
>> +	}
>> +
>>  	if (kvm_is_device_pfn(pfn)) {
>>  		mem_type = PAGE_S2_DEVICE;
>>  		flags |= KVM_S2PTE_FLAG_IS_IOMAP;
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
> 
> 
> .
>