linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: fix vcpu->mmio

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: <20121022125854.GT29310@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:58:54 +0200
From:	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: fix vcpu->mmio_fragments overflow

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 02:55:14PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-10-22 14:53, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 02:45:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2012-10-22 14:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>> On 10/22/2012 01:45 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> Indeed. git pull, recheck and call for kvm_flush_coalesced_mmio_buffer()
> >>>>> is gone. So this will break new userspace, not old. By global you mean
> >>>>> shared between devices (or memory regions)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes. We only have a single ring per VM, so we cannot flush multi-second
> >>>> VGA access separately from other devices. In theory solvable by
> >>>> introducing per-region rings that can be driven separately.
> >>>
> >>> But in practice unneeded.  Real time VMs can disable coalescing and not
> >>> use planar VGA modes.
> >>
> >> A) At least right now, we do not differentiate between the VGA modes and
> >> if flushing is needed. So that device is generally taboo for RT cores of
> >> the VM.
> >> B) We need to disable coalescing in E1000 as well - if we want to use
> >> that model.
> >> C) Gleb seems to propose using coalescing far beyond those two use cases.
> >>
> > Since the userspace change is needed the idea is dead, but if we could
> > implement it I do not see how it can hurt the latency if it would be the
> > only mechanism to use coalesced mmio buffer. Checking that the ring buffer
> > is empty is cheap and if it is not empty it means that kernel just saved
> > you a lot of 8 bytes exists so even after iterating over all the entries there
> > you still saved a lot of time.
> 
> When taking an exit for A, I'm not interesting in flushing stuff for B
> unless I have a dependency. Thus, buffers would have to be per device
> before extending their use.
> 
Buts this is not what will happen (in the absence of other users of
coalesced mmio). What will happen is instead of taking 200 exists for B
you will take 1 exit for B.

--
			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/