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: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:32:50 -1000 From: Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com> To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> CC: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>, Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [KVM timekeeping 10/35] Fix deep C-state TSC desynchronization On 09/14/2010 12:40 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Am 14.09.2010 11:27, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 09/14/2010 11:10 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> Am 20.08.2010 10:07, Zachary Amsden wrote: >>> >>>> When CPUs with unstable TSCs enter deep C-state, TSC may stop >>>> running. This causes us to require resynchronization. Since >>>> we can't tell when this may potentially happen, we assume the >>>> worst by forcing re-compensation for it at every point the VCPU >>>> task is descheduled. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden<zamsden@...hat.com> >>>> --- >>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >>>> index 7fc4a55..52b6c21 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >>>> @@ -1866,7 +1866,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu) >>>> } >>>> >>>> kvm_x86_ops->vcpu_load(vcpu, cpu); >>>> - if (unlikely(vcpu->cpu != cpu)) { >>>> + if (unlikely(vcpu->cpu != cpu) || check_tsc_unstable()) { >>>> /* Make sure TSC doesn't go backwards */ >>>> s64 tsc_delta = !vcpu->arch.last_host_tsc ? 0 : >>>> native_read_tsc() - vcpu->arch.last_host_tsc; >>>> >>> For yet unknown reason, this commit breaks Linux guests here if they are >>> started with only a single VCPU. They hang during boot, obviously no >>> longer receiving interrupts. >>> >>> I'm using kvm-kmod against a 2.6.34 host kernel, so this may be a side >>> effect of the wrapping, though I cannot imagine how. >>> >>> Anyone any ideas? >>> >>> >>> >> Most likely, time went backwards, and some 'future - past' calculation >> resulted in a negative sleep value which was then interpreted as >> unsigned and resulted in a 2342525634 year sleep. >> > Looks like that's the case on first glance at the apic state. > This compensation effectively nulls the delta between current and last TSC: if (unlikely(vcpu->cpu != cpu) || check_tsc_unstable()) { /* Make sure TSC doesn't go backwards */ s64 tsc_delta = !vcpu->arch.last_host_tsc ? 0 : native_read_tsc() - vcpu->arch.last_host_tsc; if (tsc_delta < 0) mark_tsc_unstable("KVM discovered backwards TSC"); if (check_tsc_unstable()) kvm_x86_ops->adjust_tsc_offset(vcpu, -tsc_delta); kvm_migrate_timers(vcpu); vcpu->cpu = cpu; If TSC has advanced quite a bit due to a TSC jump during sleep(*), it will adjust the offset backwards to compensate; similarly, if it has gone backwards, it will advance the offset. In neither case should the visible TSC go backwards, assuming last_host_tsc is recorded properly, and so kvmclock should be similarly unaffected. Perhaps the guest is more intelligent than we hope, and is comparing two different clocks: kvmclock or TSC with the rate of PIT interrupts. This could result in negative arithmetic begin interpreted as unsigned. Are you using PIT interrupt reinjection on this guest or passing -no-kvm-pit-reinjection? > >> Does your guest use kvmclock, tsc, or some other time source? >> > A kernel that has kvmclock support even hangs in SMP mode. The others > pick hpet or acpi_pm. TSC is considered unstable. > SMP mode here has always and will always be unreliable. Are you running on an Intel or AMD CPU? The origin of this code comes from a workaround for (*) in vendor-specific code, and perhaps it is inappropriate for both. Zach -- 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