linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] kvm,rcu,nohz: use RCU extended quiescent state when running KVM guest

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: <54DA630D.6020601@amacapital.net>
Date:	Tue, 10 Feb 2015 11:59:09 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	riel@...hat.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC:	will.deacon@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Catalin.Marinas@....com, fweisbec@...il.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	mtosatti@...hat.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, mingo@...nel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, lcapitulino@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] kvm,rcu,nohz: use RCU extended quiescent state when
 running KVM guest

On 02/10/2015 06:41 AM, riel@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
>
> The host kernel is not doing anything while the CPU is executing
> a KVM guest VCPU, so it can be marked as being in an extended
> quiescent state, identical to that used when running user space
> code.
>
> The only exception to that rule is when the host handles an
> interrupt, which is already handled by the irq code, which
> calls rcu_irq_enter and rcu_irq_exit.
>
> The guest_enter and guest_exit functions already switch vtime
> accounting independent of context tracking. Leave those calls
> where they are, instead of moving them into the context tracking
> code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> ---
>   include/linux/context_tracking.h       | 6 ++++++
>   include/linux/context_tracking_state.h | 1 +
>   include/linux/kvm_host.h               | 3 ++-
>   3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/context_tracking.h b/include/linux/context_tracking.h
> index 954253283709..b65fd1420e53 100644
> --- a/include/linux/context_tracking.h
> +++ b/include/linux/context_tracking.h
> @@ -80,10 +80,16 @@ static inline void guest_enter(void)
>   		vtime_guest_enter(current);
>   	else
>   		current->flags |= PF_VCPU;
> +
> +	if (context_tracking_is_enabled())
> +		context_tracking_enter(IN_GUEST);

Why the if statement?

Also, have you checked how much this hurts guest lightweight entry/exit 
latency?  Context tracking is shockingly expensive for reasons I don't 
fully understand, but hopefully most of it is the vtime stuff.  (Context 
tracking is *so* expensive that I almost think we should set the 
performance taint flag if we enable it, assuming that flag ended up 
getting merged.  Also, we should make context tracking faster.)

--Andy
--
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/