[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200414141507.0d0a0f93@why>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:15:07 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
Cc: <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>, <james.morse@....com>,
<julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com>, <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
<wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com>, <yezengruan@...wei.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-v3: Retire all pending LPIs on
vcpu destroy
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 19:17:49 +0800
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com> wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On 2020/4/14 18:54, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:03:47 +0800
> > Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Zenghui,
> >
> >> It's likely that the vcpu fails to handle all virtual interrupts if
> >> userspace decides to destroy it, leaving the pending ones stay in the
> >> ap_list. If the un-handled one is a LPI, its vgic_irq structure will
> >> be eventually leaked because of an extra refcount increment in
> >> vgic_queue_irq_unlock().
> >>
> >> This was detected by kmemleak on almost every guest destroy, the
> >> backtrace is as follows:
> >>
> >> unreferenced object 0xffff80725aed5500 (size 128):
> >> comm "CPU 5/KVM", pid 40711, jiffies 4298024754 (age 166366.512s)
> >> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> >> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 08 01 a9 73 6d 80 ff ff ...........sm...
> >> c8 61 ee a9 00 20 ff ff 28 1e 55 81 6c 80 ff ff .a... ..(.U.l...
> >> backtrace:
> >> [<000000004bcaa122>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2dc/0x418
> >> [<0000000069c7dabb>] vgic_add_lpi+0x88/0x418
> >> [<00000000bfefd5c5>] vgic_its_cmd_handle_mapi+0x4dc/0x588
> >> [<00000000cf993975>] vgic_its_process_commands.part.5+0x484/0x1198
> >> [<000000004bd3f8e3>] vgic_its_process_commands+0x50/0x80
> >> [<00000000b9a65b2b>] vgic_mmio_write_its_cwriter+0xac/0x108
> >> [<0000000009641ebb>] dispatch_mmio_write+0xd0/0x188
> >> [<000000008f79d288>] __kvm_io_bus_write+0x134/0x240
> >> [<00000000882f39ac>] kvm_io_bus_write+0xe0/0x150
> >> [<0000000078197602>] io_mem_abort+0x484/0x7b8
> >> [<0000000060954e3c>] kvm_handle_guest_abort+0x4cc/0xa58
> >> [<00000000e0d0cd65>] handle_exit+0x24c/0x770
> >> [<00000000b44a7fad>] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x460/0x1988
> >> [<0000000025fb897c>] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4f8/0xee0
> >> [<000000003271e317>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x160/0xcd8
> >> [<00000000e7f39607>] ksys_ioctl+0x98/0xd8
> >>
> >> Fix it by retiring all pending LPIs in the ap_list on the destroy path.
> >>
> >> p.s. I can also reproduce it on a normal guest shutdown. It is because
> >> userspace still send LPIs to vcpu (through KVM_SIGNAL_MSI ioctl) while
> >> the guest is being shutdown and unable to handle it. A little strange
> >> though and haven't dig further...
> >
> > What userspace are you using? You'd hope that the VMM would stop
> > processing I/Os when destroying the guest. But we still need to handle
> > it anyway, and I thing this fix makes sense.
>
> I'm using Qemu (master) for debugging. Looks like an interrupt
> corresponding to a virtio device configuration change, triggered after
> all other devices had freed their irqs. Not sure if it's expected.
>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
> >> ---
> >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c | 6 ++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c
> >> index a963b9d766b7..53ec9b9d9bc4 100644
> >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c
> >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c
> >> @@ -348,6 +348,12 @@ void kvm_vgic_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> {
> >> struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> >> >> + /*
> >> + * Retire all pending LPIs on this vcpu anyway as we're
> >> + * going to destroy it.
> >> + */
> >> + vgic_flush_pending_lpis(vcpu);
> >> +
> >> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vgic_cpu->ap_list_head);
> >> }
> >> > > I guess that at this stage, the INIT_LIST_HEAD() is superfluous, right?
>
> I was just thinking that the ap_list_head may not be empty (besides LPI,
> with other active or pending interrupts), so leave it unchanged.
It isn't clear what purpose this serves (the vcpus are about to be
freed, and so are the ap_lists), but I guess it doesn't hurt either.
I'll queue both patches.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists