| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:57:28 +0800
From: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Feng Jin <joe.jin@...cle.com>,
Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@...cle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chien Yen <chien.yen@...cle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver
load first time
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>
>>
>> Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
>>
>>
>> I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
>>
>> if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>> {
>> spin_lock(&d->event_lock);
>> gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,"d%d, pirq: %d is %x %s, irq: %d\n",
>> d->domain_id, pirq, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq),
>> domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) == IRQ_UNBOUND ? "unbound" : "",
>> domain_pirq_to_irq(d, pirq));
>>
>> if ( domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND )
>> ret = unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq(d, pirq);
>> spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
>> if ( domid == DOMID_SELF || ret )
>> goto free_domain;
>>
>> It always tells me unbound:
>>
>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 54 is ffffffff
>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 53 is ffffffff
>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 52 is ffffffff
>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 51 is ffffffff
>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 50 is ffffffff
>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>> (a bit older debug code, so the 'unbound' does not show up here).
>>
>> Which means that the call to unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq does not happen.
>> The checks in unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq also look to be depend
>> on the code being IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>
>> In other words, all of that code looks to only clear things when
>> they are !IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>
>> But the other logic (IRQ_UNBOUND) looks to be missing a removal
>> in the radix tree:
>>
>> if ( emuirq != IRQ_PT )
>> radix_tree_delete(&d->arch.hvm_domain.emuirq_pirq, emuirq);
>>
>> And I think that is what is causing the leak - the radix tree
>> needs to be pruned? Or perhaps the allocate_pirq should check
>> the radix tree for IRQ_UNBOUND ones and re-use them?
>>
>>
>> I think that you are looking in the wrong place.
>> The issue is that QEMU doesn't call pt_msi_disable in
>> pt_msgctrl_reg_write if (!val & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE).
>>
>> The code above is correct as is because it is trying to handle emulated
>> IRQs and MSIs, not real passthrough MSIs. They latter are not added to
>> that radix tree, see physdev_hvm_map_pirq and physdev_map_pirq.
>>
>>
>>
>> This patch fixes the issue, I have only tested MSI (MSI-X completely
>> untested).
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/pass-through.c b/hw/pass-through.c
>> index 304c438..079e465 100644
>> --- a/hw/pass-through.c
>> +++ b/hw/pass-through.c
>> @@ -3866,7 +3866,11 @@ static int pt_msgctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev *ptdev,
>> ptdev->msi->flags |= PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>> }
>> else
>> - ptdev->msi->flags &= ~PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>> + {
>> + if (ptdev->msi->flags & PT_MSI_MAPPED) {
>> + pt_msi_disable(ptdev);
>> + }
>> + }
>>
>> /* pass through MSI_ENABLE bit when no MSI-INTx translation */
>> if (!ptdev->msi_trans_en) {
>> @@ -4013,6 +4017,8 @@ static int pt_msixctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev *ptdev,
>> pt_disable_msi_translate(ptdev);
>> }
>> pt_msix_update(ptdev);
>> + } else if (!(*value & PCI_MSIX_ENABLE) && ptdev->msix->enabled) {
>> + pt_msix_delete(ptdev);
>>
>>
>> Hi Stefano,
>> I made a test with this patch, os reboot when driver reload. If use pt_msix_disable
>> instead of pt_msix_delete, driver could be reloaded.
>> But I still see some error in qemu.log and xen console. Seems four IRQs are not freed
>> when unmap.
>> --------------first load---------------------------
>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 103
>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 0 with pirq 67 gvec 0
>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 102
>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 1 with pirq 66 gvec 0
>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 101
>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 2 with pirq 65 gvec 0
>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 100
>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 3 with pirq 64 gvec 0
>> ------------- first unload---------------------------
>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 67, gvec 0
>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 67
>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 66, gvec 0
>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 66
>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 65, gvec 0
>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 65
>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 64, gvec 0
>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 64
>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
> Can you add some printks in Xen (the hypercall name is
> PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq) to figure out exactly why they are failing?
Did some test, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, unmap->pirq) = IRQ_UNBOUND in
physdev_unmap_pirq.
zduan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists