Hi Gautam,
A few comments below ...
Gautam Menghani <gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Mask off the LPCR_MER bit before running a vCPU to ensure that it is not
> set if there are no pending interrupts.
I would typically leave this until the end of the change log. ie.
describe the bug and how it happens first, then the fix at the end.
But it's not a hard rule, so up to you.
> Running a vCPU with LPCR_MER bit
^
"an L2 vCPU"
In general if you can qualify L0 vs L1 vs L2 everywhere it would help
folks follow the description.
> set and no pending interrupts results in L2 vCPU getting an infinite flood
> of spurious interrupts. The 'if check' in kvmhv_run_single_vcpu() sets
> the LPCR_MER bit if there are pending interrupts.
>
> The spurious flood problem can be observed in 2 cases:
> 1. Crashing the guest while interrupt heavy workload is running
> a. Start a L2 guest and run an interrupt heavy workload (eg: ipistorm)
> b. While the workload is running, crash the guest (make sure kdump
> is configured)
> c. Any one of the vCPUs of the guest will start getting an infinite
> flood of spurious interrupts.
>
> 2. Running LTP stress tests in multiple guests at the same time
> a. Start 4 L2 guests.
> b. Start running LTP stress tests on all 4 guests at same time.
> c. In some time, any one/more of the vCPUs of any of the guests will
> start getting an infinite flood of spurious interrupts.
>
> The root cause of both the above issues is the same:
> 1. A NMI is sent to a running vCPU that has LPCR_MER bit set.
> 2. In the NMI path, all registers are refreshed, i.e, H_GUEST_GET_STATE
> is called for all the registers.
> 3. When H_GUEST_GET_STATE is called for lpcr, the vcpu->arch.vcore->lpcr
> of that vCPU at L1 level gets updated with LPCR_MER set to 1, and this
> new value is always used whenever that vCPU runs, regardless of whether
> there was a pending interrupt.
> 4. Since LPCR_MER is set, the vCPU in L2 always jumps to the external
> interrupt handler, and this cycle never ends.
>
> Fix the spurious flood by making sure a vCPU's LPCR_MER is always masked
> before running a vCPU.
I think your original sentence at the top of the change log is actually more
accurate. ie. it's not that LPCR_MER is always cleared, it's cleared
*unless there's a pending interrupt*.
> Fixes: ec0f6639fa88 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV nestedv2: Ensure LPCR_MER bit is passed to the L0")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # v6.8+
> Signed-off-by: Gautam Menghani <gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> V1 -> V2:
> 1. Mask off the LPCR_MER in vcpu->arch.vcore->lpcr instead of resetting
> it so that we avoid grabbing vcpu->arch.vcore->lock. (Suggested by
> Ritesh in an internal review)
Did v1 take the vcore->lock? I don't remember it.
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> index 8f7d7e37bc8c..b8701b5dde50 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> @@ -5089,9 +5089,19 @@ static int kvmppc_vcpu_run_hv(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> do {
> accumulate_time(vcpu, &vcpu->arch.guest_entry);
> + /*
> + * L1's copy of L2's lpcr (vcpu->arch.vcore->lpcr) can get its MER bit
^
LPCR
> + * unexpectedly set - for e.g. during NMI handling when all register
> + * states are synchronized from L0 to L1. L1 needs to inform L0 about
> + * MER=1 only when there are pending external interrupts.
> + * kvmhv_run_single_vcpu() anyway sets MER bit if there are pending
> + * external interrupts. Hence, mask off MER bit when passing vcore->lpcr
> + * here as otherwise it may generate spurious interrupts in L2 KVM
> + * causing an endless loop, which results in L2 guest getting hung.
> + */
> if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_300))
> r = kvmhv_run_single_vcpu(vcpu, ~(u64)0,
> - vcpu->arch.vcore->lpcr);
> + vcpu->arch.vcore->lpcr & ~LPCR_MER);
This is much better than v1 which hid the clearing of LPCR_MER in a macro.
But I still wonder if it would be better to clear it in
kvmhv_run_single_vcpu() itself.
The logic to set LPCR_MER is already in there, so why not ensure
LPCR_MER is cleared as part of that some block?
I realise there's another caller of kvmhv_run_single_vcpu() from the
nested code, but that's OK because there's already a nested check in
kvmhv_run_single_vcpu(), so you can still isolate this change to just
the non-nested case.
cheers
