From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
To: Yi Wang <up2wing@gmail.com>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
hpa@zytor.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
wanpengli@tencent.com, Yi Wang <foxywang@tencent.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: irqchip: synchronize srcu only if needed
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:50:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <72edaedc-50d7-415e-9c45-f17ffe0c1c23@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN35MuSkQf0XmBZ5ZXGhcpUCGD-kKoyTv9G7ya4QVD1xiqOxLg@mail.gmail.com>
Am 15.01.24 um 17:01 schrieb Yi Wang:
> Many thanks for your such kind and detailed reply, Sean!
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:28 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> +other KVM maintainers
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2024, Yi Wang wrote:
>>> From: Yi Wang <foxywang@tencent.com>
>>>
>>> We found that it may cost more than 20 milliseconds very accidentally
>>> to enable cap of KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP on a host which has many vms
>>> already.
>>>
>>> The reason is that when vmm(qemu/CloudHypervisor) invokes
>>> KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP kvm will call synchronize_srcu_expedited() and
>>> might_sleep and kworker of srcu may cost some delay during this period.
>>
>> might_sleep() yielding is not justification for changing KVM. That's more or
>> less saying "my task got preempted and took longer to run". Well, yeah.
>
> Agree. But I suppose it may be one of the reasons that makes time of
> KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP delayed, of course, the kworker has the biggest
> suspicion :)
>
>>
>>> Since this happens during creating vm, it's no need to synchronize srcu
>>> now 'cause everything is not ready(vcpu/irqfd) and none uses irq_srcu now.
>
> ....
>
>> And on x86, I'm pretty sure as of commit 654f1f13ea56 ("kvm: Check irqchip mode
>> before assign irqfd"), which added kvm_arch_irqfd_allowed(), it's impossible for
>> kvm_irq_map_gsi() to encounter a NULL irq_routing _on x86_.
>>
>> But I strongly suspect other architectures can reach kvm_irq_map_gsi() with a
>> NULL irq_routing, e.g. RISC-V dynamically configures its interrupt controller,
>> yet doesn't implement kvm_arch_intc_initialized().
>>
>> So instead of special casing x86, what if we instead have KVM setup an empty
>> IRQ routing table during kvm_create_vm(), and then avoid this mess entirely?
>> That way x86 and s390 no longer need to set empty/dummy routing when creating
>> an IRQCHIP, and the worst case scenario of userspace misusing an ioctl() is no
>> longer a NULL pointer deref.
Sounds like a good idea. This should also speedup guest creation on s390 since
it would avoid one syncronize_irq.
>
> To setup an empty IRQ routing table during kvm_create_vm() sounds a good idea,
> at this time vCPU have not been created and kvm->lock is held so skipping
> synchronization is safe here.
>
> However, there is one drawback, if vmm wants to emulate irqchip
> itself, e.g. qemu
> with command line '-machine kernel-irqchip=off' may not need irqchip
> in kernel. How
> do we handle this issue?
I would be fine with wasted memory. The only question is does it have a functional
impact or can we simply ignore the dummy routing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-16 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-12 9:11 Yi Wang
2024-01-12 16:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-15 16:01 ` Yi Wang
2024-01-16 16:50 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2024-01-16 16:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-17 0:56 ` Yi Wang
2024-01-17 0:46 ` Yi Wang
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=72edaedc-50d7-415e-9c45-f17ffe0c1c23@linux.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=foxywang@tencent.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=up2wing@gmail.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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®