| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1b404477-8bff-0d33-477f-514e12ba8546@bytedance.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 06:24:13 +0000
From: Usama Arif <usama.arif@...edance.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
yezengruan@...wei.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
maz@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com
Cc: fam.zheng@...edance.com, liangma@...ngbit.com,
punit.agrawal@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [RFC 5/6] KVM: arm64: Support the VCPU preemption
check
On 03/11/2022 13:25, Steven Price wrote:
> On 02/11/2022 16:13, Usama Arif wrote:
>> Support the vcpu_is_preempted() functionality under KVM/arm64. This will
>> enhance lock performance on overcommitted hosts (more runnable VCPUs
>> than physical CPUs in the system) as doing busy waits for preempted
>> VCPUs will hurt system performance far worse than early yielding.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zengruan Ye <yezengruan@...wei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif <usama.arif@...edance.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h | 2 +
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h | 16 +++-
>> arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c | 126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c | 3 +
>> include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 +
>> 5 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
>> index 9aa193e0e8f2..4ccb4356c56b 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
>> @@ -19,10 +19,12 @@ static inline u64 paravirt_steal_clock(int cpu)
>> }
>>
>> int __init pv_time_init(void);
>> +int __init pv_lock_init(void);
>>
>> #else
>>
>> #define pv_time_init() do {} while (0)
>> +#define pv_lock_init() do {} while (0)
>>
>> #endif // CONFIG_PARAVIRT
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
>> index 0525c0b089ed..7023efa4de96 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
>> @@ -10,7 +10,20 @@
>>
>> /* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
>> #define smp_mb__after_spinlock() smp_mb()
>> +#define vcpu_is_preempted vcpu_is_preempted
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT
>> +#include <linux/static_call_types.h>
>> +
>> +bool dummy_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu);
>>
>> +DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(pv_vcpu_is_preempted, dummy_vcpu_is_preempted);
>> +static inline bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
>> +{
>> + return static_call(pv_vcpu_is_preempted)(cpu);
>> +}
>> +
>> +#else
>> /*
>> * Changing this will break osq_lock() thanks to the call inside
>> * smp_cond_load_relaxed().
>> @@ -18,10 +31,11 @@
>> * See:
>> * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200110100612.GC2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
>> */
>> -#define vcpu_is_preempted vcpu_is_preempted
>> static inline bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
>> {
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PARAVIRT */
>> +
>> #endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
>> index 57c7c211f8c7..45bcca87bed7 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>
>> #include <asm/paravirt.h>
>> #include <asm/pvclock-abi.h>
>> +#include <asm/pvlock-abi.h>
>> #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
>>
>> struct static_key paravirt_steal_enabled;
>> @@ -38,7 +39,12 @@ struct pv_time_stolen_time_region {
>> struct pvclock_vcpu_stolen_time __rcu *kaddr;
>> };
>>
>> +struct pv_lock_state_region {
>> + struct pvlock_vcpu_state __rcu *kaddr;
>> +};
>> +
>> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pv_time_stolen_time_region, stolen_time_region);
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pv_lock_state_region, lock_state_region);
>>
>> static bool steal_acc = true;
>> static int __init parse_no_stealacc(char *arg)
>> @@ -178,3 +184,123 @@ int __init pv_time_init(void)
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +
>> +static bool native_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
>> +{
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(pv_vcpu_is_preempted, native_vcpu_is_preempted);
>> +
>> +static bool para_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
>> +{
>> + struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
>> + __le64 preempted_le;
>> +
>> + reg = per_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region, cpu);
>> + if (!reg->kaddr) {
>> + pr_warn_once("PV lock enabled but not configured for cpu %d\n",
>> + cpu);
>> + return false;
>> + }
>> +
>> + preempted_le = le64_to_cpu(READ_ONCE(reg->kaddr->preempted));
>> +
>> + return !!(preempted_le);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int pvlock_vcpu_state_dying_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> + struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
>> +
>> + reg = this_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region);
>> + if (!reg->kaddr)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + memunmap(reg->kaddr);
>> + memset(reg, 0, sizeof(*reg));
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int init_pvlock_vcpu_state(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> + struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
>> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
>> +
>> + reg = this_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region);
>> +
>> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_PREEMPTED, &res);
>> +
>> + if (res.a0 == SMCCC_RET_NOT_SUPPORTED) {
>> + pr_warn("Failed to init PV lock data structure\n");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + reg->kaddr = memremap(res.a0,
>> + sizeof(struct pvlock_vcpu_state),
>> + MEMREMAP_WB);
>> +
>> + if (!reg->kaddr) {
>> + pr_warn("Failed to map PV lock data structure\n");
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int kvm_arm_init_pvlock(void)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ARM_KVM_PVLOCK_STARTING,
>> + "hypervisor/arm/pvlock:starting",
>> + init_pvlock_vcpu_state,
>> + pvlock_vcpu_state_dying_cpu);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + pr_warn("PV-lock init failed\n");
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static bool has_kvm_pvlock(void)
>> +{
>> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
>> +
>> + /* To detect the presence of PV lock support we require SMCCC 1.1+ */
>> + if (arm_smccc_1_1_get_conduit() == SMCCC_CONDUIT_NONE)
>> + return false;
>
> This is unnecessary as arm_smccc_1_1_invoke() will return failure if
> there's no conduit (or pre-SMCCC 1.1). I suspect this was a copy/paste
> from has_pv_steal_clock() which also has the unnecessary check (patch
> welcome ;) ).
Thanks for the review!
I have sent a seperate patch to remove it from pv_steal_clock:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221104061659.4116508-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com/.
I have removed it from pv_lock as well in the v2 patchset:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221104062105.4119003-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com/.
>
>> +
>> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_FEATURES_FUNC_ID,
>> + ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_FEATURES, &res);
>
> Since this is a 'OWNER_VENDOR_HYP' call this should really be preceded
> by a check that we're running under the expected hypervisor. See e.g.
> kvm_init_hyp_services().
>
> Of course for KVM we already have a (different) discovery mechanism and
> this could be included as a ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_xxx feature. This
> has_kvm_pvlock() function would then simply be:
>
> static bool has_kvm_pvlock(void)
> {
> return kvm_arm_hyp_service_available(ARM_SMCC_KVM_FUNC_PVLOCK);
> }
Thanks, I have simplified has_kvm_pvlock to above. I also changed the
code in the v2 revision, so that its just 1 hypercall,
ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PV_LOCK_FUNC_ID. This is similar to how it is
done in ptp_kvm vendor call.
Usama
>
> Steve
>
>> +
>> + if (res.a0 != SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_FEATURES,
>> + ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_PREEMPTED, &res);
>> +
>> + return (res.a0 == SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS);
>> +}
>> +
>> +int __init pv_lock_init(void)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + if (is_hyp_mode_available())
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + if (!has_kvm_pvlock())
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + ret = kvm_arm_init_pvlock();
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + static_call_update(pv_vcpu_is_preempted, para_vcpu_is_preempted);
>> + pr_info("using PV-lock preempted\n");
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> \ No newline at end of file
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
>> index fea3223704b6..05ca07ac5800 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
>> #include <asm/cpu_ops.h>
>> #include <asm/kasan.h>
>> #include <asm/numa.h>
>> +#include <asm/paravirt.h>
>> #include <asm/sections.h>
>> #include <asm/setup.h>
>> #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
>> @@ -360,6 +361,8 @@ void __init __no_sanitize_address setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
>> smp_init_cpus();
>> smp_build_mpidr_hash();
>>
>> + pv_lock_init();
>> +
>> /* Init percpu seeds for random tags after cpus are set up. */
>> kasan_init_sw_tags();
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>> index f61447913db9..c0ee11855c73 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>> @@ -192,6 +192,7 @@ enum cpuhp_state {
>> /* Must be the last timer callback */
>> CPUHP_AP_DUMMY_TIMER_STARTING,
>> CPUHP_AP_ARM_XEN_STARTING,
>> + CPUHP_AP_ARM_KVM_PVLOCK_STARTING,
>> CPUHP_AP_ARM_CORESIGHT_STARTING,
>> CPUHP_AP_ARM_CORESIGHT_CTI_STARTING,
>> CPUHP_AP_ARM64_ISNDEP_STARTING,
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists