linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC V6 1/5] kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2012 11:38:25 +0300
From:	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	X86 <x86@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xen <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V6 1/5] kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM
 hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:22:34AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/29/2012 04:52 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 04:26:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > On 04/29/2012 04:20 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > > > This is too similar to kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic(). Why not reuse it. We
> > > > > > can use one of reserved delivery modes as PV delivery mode. We will
> > > > > > disallow guest to trigger it through apic interface, so this will not be
> > > > > > part of ABI and can be changed at will.
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not thrilled about this.  Those delivery modes will eventually
> > > > > become unreserved.  We can have a kvm_lookup_apic_id() that is shared
> > > > > among implementations.
> > > > > 
> > > > This is only internal implementation. If they become unreserved we will
> > > > use something else.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I'm thinking of that time.  Why do something temporary and fragile?
> > > 
> > Why is it fragile? Just by unreserving the value Intel will not break
> > KVM. Only when KVM will implement apic feature that unreserves the value
> > we will have to change internal implementation and use another value,
> > but this will be done by the same patch that does unreserving. The
> > unreserving may even never happen. 
> 
> Some remains of that may leak somewhere.
I do not see where. APIC code should #GP if a guest attempts to set
reserved values through APIC interface, or at least ignore them.

>                                           Why not add an extra
> parameter?
Yes, we can add extra parameter to "struct kvm_lapic_irq" and propagate it to
__apic_accept_irq(). We can do that now, or when Intel unreserve all
reserved values. I prefer the later since I do not believe it will
happen in observable feature.

>              Or do something like
> 
> kvm_for_each_apic_dest(vcpu, apic_destination) {
>       ...
> }
> 
> That can be reused in both the apic code and pv kick.
> 
That's exactly what kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic() is.

> > Meanwhile kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic()
> > will likely be optimized to use hash for unicast delivery and unhalt
> > hypercall will benefit from it immediately.
> 
> Overloading delivery mode is not the only way to achieve sharing.
> 
It is simplest and most straightforward with no demonstratable drawbacks :)
Adding parameter to "struct kvm_lapic_irq" is next best thing.

--
			Gleb.
--
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/