[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ble1gkgx.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 10:33:18 +0100
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
w90p710@...il.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "KVM: x86: Unconditionally enable irqs in guest
context"
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>
>> Looking back, I don't quite understand why we wanted to account ticks
>> between vmexit and exiting guest context as 'guest' in the first place;
>> to my understanging 'guest time' is time spent within VMX non-root
>> operation, the rest is KVM overhead (system).
>
> With tick-based accounting, if the tick IRQ is received after PF_VCPU is cleared
> then that tick will be accounted to the host/system. The motivation for opening
> an IRQ window after VM-Exit is to handle the case where the guest is constantly
> exiting for a different reason _just_ before the tick arrives, e.g. if the guest
> has its tick configured such that the guest and host ticks get synchronized
> in a bad way.
>
> This is a non-issue when using CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN=y, at least with a
> stable TSC, as the accounting happens during guest_exit_irqoff() itself.
> Accounting might be less-than-stellar if TSC is unstable, but I don't think it
> would be as binary of a failure as tick-based accounting.
>
Oh, yea, I vaguely remember we had to deal with a very similar problem
but for userspace/kernel accounting. It was possible to observe e.g. a
userspace task going 100% kernel while in reality it was just perfectly
synchronized with the tick and doing a syscall just before it arrives
(or something like that, I may be misremembering the details).
So depending on the frequency, it is probably possible to e.g observe
'100% host' with tick based accounting, the guest just has to
synchronize exiting to KVM in a way that the tick will always arrive
past guest_exit_irqoff().
It seems to me this is a fundamental problem in case the frequency of
guest exits can match the frequency of the time accounting tick.
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists