Hi Marc,
On 15/03/18 11:01, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 15/03/18 09:31, Auger Eric wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>> On 14/03/18 19:37, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> It was recently reported that VFIO mediated devices, and anything
>>> that VFIO exposes as level interrupts, do no strictly follow the
>>> expected logic of such interrupts as it only lowers the input
>>> line when the guest has EOId the interrupt at the GIC level, rather
>>> than when it Acked the interrupt at the device level.
>>>
>>> THe GIC's Active+Pending state is fundamentally incompatible with
>>> this behaviour, as it prevents KVM from observing the EOI, and in
>>> turn results in VFIO never dropping the line. This results in an
>>> interrupt storm in the guest, which it really never expected.
>>>
>>> As we cannot really change VFIO to follow the strict rules of level
>>> signalling, let's forbid the A+P state altogether, as it is in the
>>> end only an optimization. It ensures that we will transition via
>>> an invalid state, which we can use to notify VFIO of the EOI.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Shunyong Yang <shunyong.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Tested-by: Shunyong Yang <shunyong.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
>>> index 29556f71b691..9356d749da1d 100644
>>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
>>> @@ -153,8 +153,35 @@ void vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> void vgic_v2_populate_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vgic_irq *irq, int lr)
>>> {
>>> u32 val = irq->intid;
>>> + bool allow_pending = true;
>>>
>>> - if (irq_is_pending(irq)) {
>>> + if (irq->active)
>>> + val |= GICH_LR_ACTIVE_BIT;
>>> +
>>> + if (irq->hw) {
>>> + val |= GICH_LR_HW;
>>> + val |= irq->hwintid << GICH_LR_PHYSID_CPUID_SHIFT;
>>> + /*
>>> + * Never set pending+active on a HW interrupt, as the
>>> + * pending state is kept at the physical distributor
>>> + * level.
>>> + */
>>> + if (irq->active)
>>> + allow_pending = false;
>>> + } else {
>>> + if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL) {
>>> + val |= GICH_LR_EOI;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Software resampling doesn't work very well
>>> + * if we allow P+A, so let's not do that.
>>> + */
>>> + if (irq->active)
>>> + allow_pending = false;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (allow_pending && irq_is_pending(irq)) {
>>> val |= GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT;
>> Can't we have this no luck unlikely scenario where soft_pending and LR
>> state A on flush? In such case, on fold we are going to reset the
>> pending_latch as we considered disappearance of LR P meant the
>> soft_pending was acked. But P now is no more logged in LR concurrently
>> with A.
>
> Good point. We can now only clear the latch when we're back to an
> invalid state. How about this (untested):
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
> index 9356d749da1d..8427586760fc 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c
> @@ -105,12 +105,9 @@ void vgic_v2_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> /*
> * Clear soft pending state when level irqs have been acked.
> - * Always regenerate the pending state.
> */
> - if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL) {
> - if (!(val & GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT))
> - irq->pending_latch = false;
> - }
> + if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL && !(val & GICH_LR_STATE))
> + irq->pending_latch = false;
>
> /*
> * Level-triggered mapped IRQs are special because we only
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
> index 6b484575cafb..dd984f726805 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c
> @@ -96,12 +96,9 @@ void vgic_v3_fold_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> /*
> * Clear soft pending state when level irqs have been acked.
> - * Always regenerate the pending state.
> */
> - if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL) {
> - if (!(val & ICH_LR_PENDING_BIT))
> - irq->pending_latch = false;
> - }
> + if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_LEVEL && !(val & ICH_LR_STATE))
> + irq->pending_latch = false;
when deactivating the IRQ, we both lower the line and remove the A state
at the same time. However isn't the pending_latch supposed to stay,
independently on the line level, as long as we don't CPENDR or handle
its P->A->invalid usual cycle?
Thanks
Eric
>
> /*
> * Level-triggered mapped IRQs are special because we only
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
