From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Hide SEV migration lockdep goo behind CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 14:51:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yqexcdad6oghl8sv@dev-arch.thelio-3990X> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220613214237.2538266-1-seanjc@google.com>
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 09:42:37PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Wrap the manipulation of @role and the manual mutex_{release,acquire}()
> invocations in CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y to squash a clang-15 warning. When
> building with -Wunused-but-set-parameter and CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=n,
> clang-15 seees there's no usage of @role in mutex_lock_killable_nested()
> and yells. PROVE_LOCKING selects DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC, and the only reason
> KVM manipulates @role is to make PROVE_LOCKING happy.
>
> To avoid true ugliness, use "i" and "j" to detect the first pass in the
> loops; the "idx" field that's used by kvm_for_each_vcpu() is guaranteed
> to be '0' on the first pass as it's simply the first entry in the vCPUs
> XArray, which is fully KVM controlled. kvm_for_each_vcpu() passes '0'
> for xa_for_each_range()'s "start", and xa_for_each_range() will not enter
> the loop if there's no entry at '0'.
>
> Fixes: 0c2c7c069285 ("KVM: SEV: Mark nested locking of vcpu->lock")
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Cc: Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
>
> Compile tested only, still haven't figured out why SEV is busted on our
> test systems with upstream kernels. I also haven't verified this squashes
> the clang-15 warning, so a thumbs up on that end would be helpful.
I can confirm that with the config that the kernel test robot provided,
the warning disappears with this patch. If it is useful:
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> # build
> arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c | 17 +++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
> index 51fd985cf21d..309bcdb2f929 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
> @@ -1606,38 +1606,35 @@ static int sev_lock_vcpus_for_migration(struct kvm *kvm,
> {
> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
> unsigned long i, j;
> - bool first = true;
>
> kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> if (mutex_lock_killable_nested(&vcpu->mutex, role))
> goto out_unlock;
>
> - if (first) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
> + if (!i)
> /*
> * Reset the role to one that avoids colliding with
> * the role used for the first vcpu mutex.
> */
> role = SEV_NR_MIGRATION_ROLES;
> - first = false;
> - } else {
> + else
> mutex_release(&vcpu->mutex.dep_map, _THIS_IP_);
> - }
> +#endif
> }
>
> return 0;
>
> out_unlock:
>
> - first = true;
> kvm_for_each_vcpu(j, vcpu, kvm) {
> if (i == j)
> break;
>
> - if (first)
> - first = false;
> - else
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
> + if (j)
> mutex_acquire(&vcpu->mutex.dep_map, role, 0, _THIS_IP_);
> -
> +#endif
>
> mutex_unlock(&vcpu->mutex);
> }
>
> base-commit: 8baacf67c76c560fed954ac972b63e6e59a6fba0
> --
> 2.36.1.476.g0c4daa206d-goog
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-13 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-13 21:42 Sean Christopherson
2022-06-13 21:51 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2022-06-14 16:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=Yqexcdad6oghl8sv@dev-arch.thelio-3990X \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pgonda@google.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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®