On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 01:25:52PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 28/05/2019 12:01, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 01:46:19PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: > >> The emulated ptimer needs to track the level changes, otherwise the > >> the interrupt will never get deasserted, resulting in the guest getting > >> stuck in an interrupt storm if it enables ptimer interrupts. This was > >> found with kvm-unit-tests; the ptimer tests hung as soon as interrupts > >> were enabled. Typical Linux guests don't have a problem as they prefer > >> using the virtual timer. > >> > >> Fixes: bee038a674875 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Rework the timer code to use a timer_map") > >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 7 ++++++- > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > >> index 7fc272ecae16..9f5d8cc8b5e5 100644 > >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > >> @@ -324,10 +324,15 @@ static void kvm_timer_update_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool new_level, > >> static void timer_emulate(struct arch_timer_context *ctx) > >> { > >> bool should_fire = kvm_timer_should_fire(ctx); > >> + struct timer_map map; > >> + > >> + get_timer_map(ctx->vcpu, &map); > >> > >> trace_kvm_timer_emulate(ctx, should_fire); > >> > >> - if (should_fire) { > >> + if (ctx == map.emul_ptimer && should_fire != ctx->irq.level) { > >> + kvm_timer_update_irq(ctx->vcpu, !ctx->irq.level, ctx); > >> + } else if (should_fire) { > >> kvm_timer_update_irq(ctx->vcpu, true, ctx); > >> return; > >> } > > > > Hmm, this doesn't feel completely right. > > > > Lowering the line of an emulated timer should only ever happen when the > > guest (or user space) writes to one of the system registers for that > > timer, which should be trapped and that should cause an update of the > > line. > > > > Are we missing a call to kvm_timer_update_irq() from > > kvm_arm_timer_set_reg() ? > > Which is exactly what we removed in 6bc210003dff, for good reasons. > Ah well, I can be wrong twice. Or even three times. > Looking at kvm_arm_timer_write_sysreg(), we end-up calling kvm_timer_vcpu_load, but not updating the irq status. > > How about something like this instead (untested): > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > index 7fc272ecae16..6a418dcc5433 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c > @@ -882,10 +882,14 @@ void kvm_arm_timer_write_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > enum kvm_arch_timer_regs treg, > u64 val) > { > + struct arch_timer_context *timer; > + > preempt_disable(); > kvm_timer_vcpu_put(vcpu); > > - kvm_arm_timer_write(vcpu, vcpu_get_timer(vcpu, tmr), treg, val); > + timer = vcpu_get_timer(vcpu, tmr); > + kvm_arm_timer_write(vcpu, timer, treg, val); > + kvm_timer_update_irq(vcpu, kvm_timer_should_fire(timer), timer); > > kvm_timer_vcpu_load(vcpu); > preempt_enable(); > Yes, that looks reasonable. Basically, in 6bc210003dff we should have only removed the call to timer_emulate, and not messed around with kvm_timer_update_irq()? After this patch, we'll have moved the call to kvm_timer_update_irq() from kvm_arm_timer_set_reg() to kvm_arm_timer_write_sysreg(). I can't seem to decide if clearly belongs in one place or the other. Thanks, Christoffer _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm