linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

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]

Message-ID: <1340574767.5076.160.camel@bling.home>
Date:	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:52:47 -0600
From:	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	avi@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jan.kiszka@...mens.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

On Sun, 2012-06-24 at 18:45 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 08:50:56AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-06-24 at 11:28 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 04:16:17PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm.h b/include/linux/kvm.h
> > > > index 2ce09aa..a916186 100644
> > > > --- a/include/linux/kvm.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/kvm.h
> > > > @@ -618,6 +618,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info {
> > > >  #define KVM_CAP_PPC_GET_SMMU_INFO 78
> > > >  #define KVM_CAP_S390_COW 79
> > > >  #define KVM_CAP_PPC_ALLOC_HTAB 80
> > > > +#define KVM_CAP_IRQFD_LEVEL_EOI 81
> > > >  
> > > >  #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -683,12 +684,15 @@ struct kvm_xen_hvm_config {
> > > >  #endif
> > > >  
> > > >  #define KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_DEASSIGN (1 << 0)
> > > > +/* Available with KVM_CAP_IRQFD_LEVEL_EOI */
> > > > +#define KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_LEVEL_EOI (1 << 1)
> > > >  
> > > >  struct kvm_irqfd {
> > > >  	__u32 fd;
> > > >  	__u32 gsi;
> > > >  	__u32 flags;
> > > > -	__u8  pad[20];
> > > > +	__u32 fd2;
> > > > +	__u8 pad[16];
> > > >  };
> > > >  
> > > >  struct kvm_clock_data {
> > > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > > > index c307c24..2bc7275 100644
> > > > --- a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > > > +++ b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > > > @@ -49,9 +49,13 @@ struct _irqfd {
> > > >  	wait_queue_t wait;
> > > >  	/* Update side is protected by irqfds.lock */
> > > >  	struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry __rcu *irq_entry;
> > > > -	/* Used for level IRQ fast-path */
> > > > +	/* Used for IRQ fast-path */
> > > >  	int gsi;
> > > >  	struct work_struct inject;
> > > > +	/* Used for level EOI path */
> > > > +	int irq_source_id;
> > > > +	struct eventfd_ctx *eoi_eventfd;
> > > > +	struct kvm_irq_ack_notifier notifier;
> > > >  	/* Used for setup/shutdown */
> > > >  	struct eventfd_ctx *eventfd;
> > > >  	struct list_head list;
> > > > @@ -62,7 +66,7 @@ struct _irqfd {
> > > >  static struct workqueue_struct *irqfd_cleanup_wq;
> > > >  
> > > >  static void
> > > > -irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > +irqfd_inject_edge(struct work_struct *work)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, inject);
> > > >  	struct kvm *kvm = irqfd->kvm;
> > > > @@ -71,6 +75,23 @@ irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
> > > >  	kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 0);
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > +static void
> > > > +irqfd_inject_level(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, inject);
> > > > +
> > > > +	kvm_set_irq(irqfd->kvm, irqfd->irq_source_id, irqfd->gsi, 1);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > I think that we can actually do this for all interrupts
> > > unconditionally. We used to need to clear level for edge, but nomore.
> > > Once you do this, can't this patch be replaced with 4/4 completely?
> > 
> > Nope, as described in my reply there, we can't mix IRQFD and IRQ_LINE
> > for a level interrupt because we need a separate source id and have no
> > way to specify it with IRQ_LINE.  Thanks,
> > 
> > Alex
> 
> OK, so the reason to set a new flag here is to assign
> a unique source ID to it? OK, so just store the source
> id in irqfd, rest of the code can be shared.
> Maybe we can make all irqfds use unique source IDs?
> Or is that too expensive for some reason?

It adds a lot of complexity when irqfd is the only interface that needs
a new source id.  We've split the discussion into two threads though,
please let's continue it in 4/4 where we're further along.  Thanks,

Alex

--
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/