[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5ea45b0d-32b5-1a13-de86-9988144c0dbe@leemhuis.info>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:30:45 +0200
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Chuck Zmudzinski <brchuckz@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.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>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>,
Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Subject: x86/PAT: Report PAT on CPUs that support PAT
without MTRR
On 13.07.22 03:36, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
> The commit 99c13b8c8896d7bcb92753bf
> ("x86/mm/pat: Don't report PAT on CPUs that don't support it")
> incorrectly failed to account for the case in init_cache_modes() when
> CPUs do support PAT and falsely reported PAT to be disabled when in
> fact PAT is enabled. In some environments, notably in Xen PV domains,
> MTRR is disabled but PAT is still enabled, and that is the case
> that the aforementioned commit failed to account for.
>
> As an unfortunate consequnce, the pat_enabled() function currently does
> not correctly report that PAT is enabled in such environments. The fix
> is implemented in init_cache_modes() by setting pat_bp_enabled to true
> in init_cache_modes() for the case that commit 99c13b8c8896d7bcb92753bf
> ("x86/mm/pat: Don't report PAT on CPUs that don't support it") failed
> to account for.
>
> This approach arranges for pat_enabled() to return true in the Xen PV
> environment without undermining the rest of PAT MSR management logic
> that considers PAT to be disabled: Specifically, no writes to the PAT
> MSR should occur.
>
> This patch fixes a regression that some users are experiencing with
> Linux as a Xen Dom0 driving particular Intel graphics devices by
> correctly reporting to the Intel i915 driver that PAT is enabled where
> previously it was falsely reporting that PAT is disabled. Some users
> are experiencing system hangs in Xen PV Dom0 and all users on Xen PV
> Dom0 are experiencing reduced graphics performance because the keying of
> the use of WC mappings to pat_enabled() (see arch_can_pci_mmap_wc())
> means that in particular graphics frame buffer accesses are quite a bit
> less performant than possible without this patch.
>
> Also, with the current code, in the Xen PV environment, PAT will not be
> disabled if the administrator sets the "nopat" boot option. Introduce
> a new boolean variable, pat_force_disable, to forcibly disable PAT
> when the administrator sets the "nopat" option to override the default
> behavior of using the PAT configuration that Xen has provided.
>
> For the new boolean to live in .init.data, init_cache_modes() also needs
> moving to .init.text (where it could/should have lived already before).
>
> Fixes: 99c13b8c8896d7bcb92753bf ("x86/mm/pat: Don't report PAT on CPUs that don't support it")
BTW, "submitting-patches.rst" says it should just be "the first 12
characters of the SHA-1 ID"
> Co-developed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Zmudzinski <brchuckz@....com>
Sorry, have to ask: is this supposed to finally fix this regression?
https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/YnHK1Z3o99eMXsVK@mail-itl/
If yes, please include Link: and Reported-by: tags, as explained in
submitting-patches.rst (I only care about the link tag, as I'm tacking
that regression).
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I deal with a lot of
reports and sometimes miss something important when writing mails like
this. If that's the case here, don't hesitate to tell me in a public
reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists