| 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: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:01:11 +0800
From: Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@...il.com>
To: "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Cc: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d
posted-interrupts
On 2015/12/21 9:55, Wu, Feng wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel-
>> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Yang Zhang
>> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 9:50 AM
>> To: Wu, Feng <feng.wu@...el.com>; pbonzini@...hat.com;
>> rkrcmar@...hat.com
>> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d
>> posted-interrupts
>>
>> On 2015/12/16 9:37, Feng Wu wrote:
>>> Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest-priority interrupts for
>>> VT-d posted-interrupts.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Feng Wu <feng.wu@...el.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 67
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h | 2 ++
>>> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 12 ++++++++--
>>> 3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>>> index e29001f..d4f2c8f 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>>> @@ -854,6 +854,73 @@ out:
>>> }
>>>
>>> /*
>>> + * This routine handles lowest-priority interrupts using vector-hashing
>>> + * mechanism. As an example, modern Intel CPUs use this method to handle
>>> + * lowest-priority interrupts.
>>> + *
>>> + * Here is the details about the vector-hashing mechanism:
>>> + * 1. For lowest-priority interrupts, store all the possible destination
>>> + * vCPUs in an array.
>>> + * 2. Use "guest vector % max number of destination vCPUs" to find the right
>>> + * destination vCPU in the array for the lowest-priority interrupt.
>>> + */
>>> +struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_intr_vector_hashing_dest(struct kvm *kvm,
>>> + struct kvm_lapic_irq *irq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kvm_apic_map *map;
>>> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + if (irq->shorthand)
>>> + return NULL;
>>> +
>>> + rcu_read_lock();
>>> + map = rcu_dereference(kvm->arch.apic_map);
>>> +
>>> + if (!map)
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + if ((irq->dest_mode != APIC_DEST_PHYSICAL) &&
>>> + kvm_lowest_prio_delivery(irq)) {
>>> + u16 cid;
>>> + int i, idx = 0;
>>> + unsigned long bitmap = 1;
>>> + unsigned int dest_vcpus = 0;
>>> + struct kvm_lapic **dst = NULL;
>>> +
>>> +
>>> + if (!kvm_apic_logical_map_valid(map))
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + apic_logical_id(map, irq->dest_id, &cid, (u16 *)&bitmap);
>>> +
>>> + if (cid >= ARRAY_SIZE(map->logical_map))
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + dst = map->logical_map[cid];
>>> +
>>> + for_each_set_bit(i, &bitmap, 16) {
>>> + if (!dst[i] && !kvm_lapic_enabled(dst[i]->vcpu)) {
>>> + clear_bit(i, &bitmap);
>>> + continue;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + dest_vcpus = hweight16(bitmap);
>>> +
>>> + if (dest_vcpus != 0) {
>>> + idx = kvm_vector_2_index(irq->vector, dest_vcpus,
>>> + &bitmap, 16);
>>> + vcpu = dst[idx-1]->vcpu;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> + return vcpu;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_intr_vector_hashing_dest);
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> * Add a pending IRQ into lapic.
>>> * Return 1 if successfully added and 0 if discarded.
>>> */
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h
>>> index 6890ef0..52bffce 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h
>>> @@ -172,4 +172,6 @@ bool kvm_intr_is_single_vcpu_fast(struct kvm *kvm,
>> struct kvm_lapic_irq *irq,
>>> struct kvm_vcpu **dest_vcpu);
>>> int kvm_vector_2_index(u32 vector, u32 dest_vcpus,
>>> const unsigned long *bitmap, u32 bitmap_size);
>>> +struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_intr_vector_hashing_dest(struct kvm *kvm,
>>> + struct kvm_lapic_irq *irq);
>>> #endif
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>>> index 5eb56ed..3f89189 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>>> @@ -10702,8 +10702,16 @@ static int vmx_update_pi_irte(struct kvm *kvm,
>> unsigned int host_irq,
>>> */
>>>
>>> kvm_set_msi_irq(e, &irq);
>>> - if (!kvm_intr_is_single_vcpu(kvm, &irq, &vcpu))
>>> - continue;
>>> +
>>> + if (!kvm_intr_is_single_vcpu(kvm, &irq, &vcpu)) {
>>> + if (!kvm_vector_hashing_enabled() ||
>>> + irq.delivery_mode !=
>> APIC_DM_LOWEST)
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + vcpu = kvm_intr_vector_hashing_dest(kvm, &irq);
>>> + if (!vcpu)
>>> + continue;
>>> + }
>>
>> I am a little confused with the 'continue'. If the destination is not
>> single vcpu, shouldn't we rollback to use non-PI mode?
>
> Here is the logic:
> - If it is single destination, we will use PI no matter it is fixed or lowest-priority.
> - If it is not single destination:
> a) It is fixed, we will use non-PI
> b) It is lowest-priority and vector-hashing is enabled, we will use PI
> c) otherwise, use non-PI
If it is single destination previously, then change to no-single mode.
Can current code cover this case?
>
> Thanks,
> Feng
>
>>
>>>
>>> vcpu_info.pi_desc_addr = __pa(vcpu_to_pi_desc(vcpu));
>>> vcpu_info.vector = irq.vector;
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> best regards
>> yang
>> --
>> 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/
--
best regards
yang
--
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