From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
avi.kivity@gmail.com,
"pbonzini@redhat.com Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] KVM: MMU: log dirty page after marking spte writable
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 22:20:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B166B522-2CDB-44CA-B594-687B45A1CF01@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131120002920.GA14230@amt.cnet>
On Nov 20, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:06:49PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 08/07/2013 09:48 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 09:02:02PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>>> Make sure we can see the writable spte before the dirt bitmap is visible
>>>>
>>>> We do this is for kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log() write-protects the spte based
>>>> on the dirty bitmap, we should ensure the writable spte can be found in rmap
>>>> before the dirty bitmap is visible. Otherwise, we cleared the dirty bitmap and
>>>> failed to write-protect the page
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 6 +++---
>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> Can you explain why this is safe, with regard to the rule
>>> at edde99ce05290e50 ?
>>
>> BTW, this log fixed this case:
>>
>> VCPU 0 KVM migration control
>>
>> write-protects all pages
>> #Pf happen then the page
>> become writable, set dirty
>> bit on the bitmap
>>
>> swap the bitmap, current bitmap is empty
>>
>> write the page (no dirty log)
>>
>> stop the guest and push
>> the remaining dirty pages
>> Stopped
>> See current bitmap is empty that means
>> no page is dirty.
>>>
>>> "The rule is that all pages are either dirty in the current bitmap,
>>> or write-protected, which is violated here."
>>
>> Actually, this rule is not complete true, there's the 3th case:
>> the window between write guest page and set dirty bitmap is valid.
>> In that window, page is write-free and not dirty logged.
>>
>> This case is based on the fact that at the final step of live migration,
>> kvm should stop the guest and push the remaining dirty pages to the
>> destination.
>>
>> They're some examples in the current code:
>> example 1, in fast_pf_fix_direct_spte():
>> if (cmpxchg64(sptep, spte, spte | PT_WRITABLE_MASK) == spte)
>> /* The window in here... */
>> mark_page_dirty(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
>>
>> example 2, in kvm_write_guest_page():
>> r = __copy_to_user((void __user *)addr + offset, data, len);
>> if (r)
>> return -EFAULT;
>> /*
>> * The window is here, the page is dirty but not logged in
>> * The bitmap.
>> */
>> mark_page_dirty(kvm, gfn);
>> return 0;
>
Hi Marcelo,
> Why is this valid ? That is, the obviously correct rule is
>
> "that all pages are either dirty in the current bitmap,
> or write-protected, which is violated here."
>
> With the window above, GET_DIRTY_LOG can be called 100 times while the
> page is dirty, but the corresponding bit not set in the dirty bitmap.
>
> It violates the documentation:
>
> /* for KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG */
> struct kvm_dirty_log {
> __u32 slot;
> __u32 padding;
> union {
> void __user *dirty_bitmap; /* one bit per page */
> __u64 padding;
> };
> };
>
> Given a memory slot, return a bitmap containing any pages dirtied
> since the last call to this ioctl. Bit 0 is the first page in the
> memory slot. Ensure the entire structure is cleared to avoid padding
> issues.
>
> The point about migration, is that GET_DIRTY_LOG is strictly correct
> because it stops vcpus.
>
> But what guarantee does userspace require, from GET_DIRTY_LOG, while vcpus are
> executing?
Aha. Single calling GET_DIRTY_LOG is useless since new dirty page can be generated
when GET_DIRTY_LOG is being returned. If user wants to get exact dirty pages the vcpus
should be stopped.
>
> With fast page fault:
>
> if (cmpxchg64(sptep, spte, spte | PT_WRITABLE_MASK) == spte)
> /* The window in here... */
> mark_page_dirty(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
>
> And the $SUBJECT set_spte reordering, the rule becomes
>
> A call to GET_DIRTY_LOG guarantees to return correct information about
> dirty pages before invocation of the previous GET_DIRTY_LOG call.
>
> (see example 1: the next GET_DIRTY_LOG will return the dirty information
> there).
>
It seems no.
The first GET_DIRTY_LOG can happen before fast-page-fault,
the second GET_DIRTY_LOG happens in the window between cmpxchg()
and mark_page_dirty(), for the second one, the information is still “incorrect”.
> The rule for sptes that is, because kvm_write_guest does not match the
> documentation at all.
You mean the case of “kvm_write_guest” is valid (I do not know why it is)?
Or anything else?
>
> So before example 1 and this patch, the rule (well for sptes at least) was
>
> "Given a memory slot, return a bitmap containing any pages dirtied
> since the last call to this ioctl. Bit 0 is the first page in the
> memory slot. Ensure the entire structure is cleared to avoid padding
> issues."
>
> Can you explain why it is OK to relax this rule?
It’s because:
1) it doesn’t break current use cases, i.e. Live migration and FB-flushing.
2) the current code, like kvm_write_guest has already broken the documentation
(the guest page has been written but missed in the dirty bitmap).
3) it’s needless to implement a exact get-dirty-pages since the dirty pages can
no be exactly got except stopping vcpus.
So i think we'd document this case instead. No?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-20 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-30 13:01 [RFC PATCH 00/12] KVM: MMU: locklessly wirte-protect Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:01 ` [PATCH 01/12] KVM: MMU: remove unused parameter Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 7:22 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 02/12] KVM: MMU: properly check last spte in fast_page_fault() Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 03/12] KVM: MMU: lazily drop large spte Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-02 14:55 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-08-02 15:42 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-02 20:27 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-08-02 22:56 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 04/12] KVM: MMU: log dirty page after marking spte writable Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-07-31 7:25 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-07 1:48 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-08-07 4:06 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-08 15:06 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-08-08 16:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-20 0:29 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-20 0:35 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-20 14:20 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2013-11-20 19:47 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-21 4:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 05/12] KVM: MMU: add spte into rmap before logging dirty page Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-07-31 7:33 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 06/12] KVM: MMU: flush tlb if the spte can be locklessly modified Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 7:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 7:50 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 07/12] KVM: MMU: redesign the algorithm of pte_list Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 8:12 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 8:37 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 8:58 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 9:19 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 08/12] KVM: MMU: introduce nulls desc Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 8:40 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 8:54 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 09/12] KVM: MMU: introduce pte-list lockless walker Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 9:20 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 9:33 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 9:46 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 10:13 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 10:49 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-28 12:15 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-28 13:36 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-29 6:50 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 9:08 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-29 9:31 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 9:51 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-29 11:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-30 11:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-09-02 7:02 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 9:31 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-29 11:33 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 12:02 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-30 11:44 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-09-02 8:50 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 10/12] KVM: MMU: allow locklessly access shadow page table out of vcpu thread Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-07 13:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-08-07 13:19 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 9:10 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-29 9:25 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 11/12] KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect the page Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:02 ` [PATCH 12/12] KVM: MMU: clean up spte_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2013-07-30 13:11 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] KVM: MMU: locklessly wirte-protect Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-03 5:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-08-04 14:15 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-29 7:16 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-08-06 13:16 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-08-08 17:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-08-09 4:51 ` Xiao Guangrong
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=B166B522-2CDB-44CA-B594-687B45A1CF01@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com \
--cc=avi.kivity@gmail.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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®