[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87k12qawwl.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 16:12:58 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, hpa@...or.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
namit@...are.com, mhiramat@...nel.org, jgross@...e.com,
bp@...en8.de, vkuznets@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, mihai.carabas@...cle.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/26] Runtime paravirt patching
Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com> writes:
> A KVM host (or another hypervisor) might advertise paravirtualized
> features and optimization hints (ex KVM_HINTS_REALTIME) which might
> become stale over the lifetime of the guest. For instance, the
> host might go from being undersubscribed to being oversubscribed
> (or the other way round) and it would make sense for the guest
> switch pv-ops based on that.
If your host changes his advertised behaviour then you want to fix the
host setup or find a competent admin.
> This lockorture splat that I saw on the guest while testing this is
> indicative of the problem:
>
> [ 1136.461522] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#8 stuck for 22s! [lock_torture_wr:12865]
> [ 1136.461542] CPU: 8 PID: 12865 Comm: lock_torture_wr Tainted: G W L 5.4.0-rc7+ #77
> [ 1136.461546] RIP: 0010:native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x15/0x220
>
> (Caused by an oversubscribed host but using mismatched native pv_lock_ops
> on the gues.)
And this illustrates what? The fact that you used a misconfigured setup.
> This series addresses the problem by doing paravirt switching at
> runtime.
You're not addressing the problem. Your fixing the symptom, which is
wrong to begin with.
> The alternative use-case is a runtime version of apply_alternatives()
> (not posted with this patch-set) that can be used for some safe subset
> of X86_FEATUREs. This could be useful in conjunction with the ongoing
> late microcode loading work that Mihai Carabas and others have been
> working on.
This has been discussed to death before and there is no safe subset as
long as this hasn't been resolved:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/alpine.DEB.2.21.1909062237580.1902@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists