[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0d385f5d-c01f-2193-ee0f-54249ee149e7@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 12:32:45 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kvm: Don't enable IRQ when IRQ enabled in kvm_wait
On 14/08/21 05:51, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> Commit f4e61f0c9add3 ("x86/kvm: Fix broken irq restoration in kvm_wait")
> replaced "local_irq_restore() when IRQ enabled" with "local_irq_enable()
> when IRQ enabled" to suppress a warnning.
>
> Although there is no similar debugging warnning for doing local_irq_enable()
> when IRQ enabled as doing local_irq_restore() in the same IRQ situation. But
> doing local_irq_enable() when IRQ enabled is no less broken as doing
> local_irq_restore() and we'd better avoid it.
>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>
> The original debugging warnning was introduced in commit 997acaf6b4b5
> ("lockdep: report broken irq restoration"). I think a similar debugging
> check and warnning should also be added to "local_irq_enable() when IRQ
> enabled" and even maybe "local_irq_disable() when IRQ disabled" to detect
> something this:
>
> | local_irq_save(flags);
> | local_irq_disable();
> | local_irq_restore(flags);
> | local_irq_enable();
>
> Or even we can do the check in lockdep+TRACE_IRQFLAGS:
>
> In lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare(), lockdep_hardirqs_enabled() was checked
> (and exit) before checking DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()), so lockdep
> can't give any warning for these kind of situations. If we did the check
> in lockdep, we would have found the problem before, and we don't need
> 997acaf6b4b5.
>
> Any thought? Mark? Peter?
>
> arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> index a26643dc6bd6..b656456c3a94 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> @@ -884,10 +884,11 @@ static void kvm_wait(u8 *ptr, u8 val)
> } else {
> local_irq_disable();
>
> + /* safe_halt() will enable IRQ */
> if (READ_ONCE(*ptr) == val)
> safe_halt();
> -
> - local_irq_enable();
> + else
> + local_irq_enable();
> }
> }
>
>
Queued, thanks.
paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists