On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 6:05 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024, James Houghton wrote: > > Walk the TDP MMU in an RCU read-side critical section. > > ...without holding mmu_lock, while doing xxx. There are a lot of TDP MMU walks, > pand they all need RCU protection. Added "without holding mmu_lock when harvesting and potentially updating age information on sptes". > > This requires a way to do RCU-safe walking of the tdp_mmu_roots; do this with > > a new macro. The PTE modifications are now done atomically, and > > kvm_tdp_mmu_spte_need_atomic_write() has been updated to account for the fact > > that kvm_age_gfn can now lockless update the accessed bit and the R/X bits). > > > > If the cmpxchg for marking the spte for access tracking fails, we simply > > retry if the spte is still a leaf PTE. If it isn't, we return false > > to continue the walk. > > Please avoid pronouns. E.g. s/we/KVM (and adjust grammar as needed), so that > it's clear what actor in particular is doing the retry. Fixed. Though, I have also changed this to reflect the change in the retry logic I've made, given your other comment. > > Harvesting age information from the shadow MMU is still done while > > holding the MMU write lock. > > > > Suggested-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: James Houghton <jthoughton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + > > arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 10 ++++- > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h | 27 +++++++------ > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > 5 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > index 950a03e0181e..096988262005 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > @@ -1456,6 +1456,7 @@ struct kvm_arch { > > * tdp_mmu_page set. > > * > > * For reads, this list is protected by: > > + * RCU alone or > > * the MMU lock in read mode + RCU or > > * the MMU lock in write mode > > * > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > index 4287a8071a3a..6ac43074c5e9 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ config KVM > > depends on X86_LOCAL_APIC > > select KVM_COMMON > > select KVM_GENERIC_MMU_NOTIFIER > > + select KVM_MMU_NOTIFIER_YOUNG_LOCKLESS > > select HAVE_KVM_IRQCHIP > > select HAVE_KVM_PFNCACHE > > select HAVE_KVM_DIRTY_RING_TSO > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > > index 901be9e420a4..7b93ce8f0680 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > > @@ -1633,8 +1633,11 @@ bool kvm_age_gfn(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range) > > { > > bool young = false; > > > > - if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm)) > > + if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm)) { > > + write_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock); > > young = kvm_handle_gfn_range(kvm, range, kvm_age_rmap); > > + write_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); > > + } > > > > if (tdp_mmu_enabled) > > young |= kvm_tdp_mmu_age_gfn_range(kvm, range); > > @@ -1646,8 +1649,11 @@ bool kvm_test_age_gfn(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range) > > { > > bool young = false; > > > > - if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm)) > > + if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm)) { > > + write_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock); > > young = kvm_handle_gfn_range(kvm, range, kvm_test_age_rmap); > > + write_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); > > + } > > > > if (tdp_mmu_enabled) > > young |= kvm_tdp_mmu_test_age_gfn(kvm, range); > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h > > index 2880fd392e0c..510936a8455a 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h > > @@ -25,6 +25,13 @@ static inline u64 kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte_atomic(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 new_spte) > > return xchg(rcu_dereference(sptep), new_spte); > > } > > > > +static inline u64 tdp_mmu_clear_spte_bits_atomic(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 mask) > > +{ > > + atomic64_t *sptep_atomic = (atomic64_t *)rcu_dereference(sptep); > > + > > + return (u64)atomic64_fetch_and(~mask, sptep_atomic); > > +} > > + > > static inline void __kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 new_spte) > > { > > KVM_MMU_WARN_ON(is_ept_ve_possible(new_spte)); > > @@ -32,10 +39,11 @@ static inline void __kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 new_spte) > > } > > > > /* > > - * SPTEs must be modified atomically if they are shadow-present, leaf > > - * SPTEs, and have volatile bits, i.e. has bits that can be set outside > > - * of mmu_lock. The Writable bit can be set by KVM's fast page fault > > - * handler, and Accessed and Dirty bits can be set by the CPU. > > + * SPTEs must be modified atomically if they have bits that can be set outside > > + * of the mmu_lock. This can happen for any shadow-present leaf SPTEs, as the > > + * Writable bit can be set by KVM's fast page fault handler, the Accessed and > > + * Dirty bits can be set by the CPU, and the Accessed and R/X bits can be > > + * cleared by age_gfn_range. > > * > > * Note, non-leaf SPTEs do have Accessed bits and those bits are > > * technically volatile, but KVM doesn't consume the Accessed bit of > > @@ -46,8 +54,7 @@ static inline void __kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 new_spte) > > static inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_spte_need_atomic_write(u64 old_spte, int level) > > { > > return is_shadow_present_pte(old_spte) && > > - is_last_spte(old_spte, level) && > > - spte_has_volatile_bits(old_spte); > > + is_last_spte(old_spte, level); > > } > > > > static inline u64 kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 old_spte, > > @@ -63,12 +70,8 @@ static inline u64 kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 old_spte, > > static inline u64 tdp_mmu_clear_spte_bits(tdp_ptep_t sptep, u64 old_spte, > > u64 mask, int level) > > { > > - atomic64_t *sptep_atomic; > > - > > - if (kvm_tdp_mmu_spte_need_atomic_write(old_spte, level)) { > > - sptep_atomic = (atomic64_t *)rcu_dereference(sptep); > > - return (u64)atomic64_fetch_and(~mask, sptep_atomic); > > - } > > + if (kvm_tdp_mmu_spte_need_atomic_write(old_spte, level)) > > + return tdp_mmu_clear_spte_bits_atomic(sptep, mask); > > > > __kvm_tdp_mmu_write_spte(sptep, old_spte & ~mask); > > return old_spte; > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > index c7dc49ee7388..3f13b2db53de 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > @@ -29,6 +29,11 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_lockdep_assert_mmu_lock_held(struct kvm *kvm, > > > > return true; > > } > > +static __always_inline bool kvm_lockdep_assert_rcu_read_lock_held(void) > > +{ > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held()); > > + return true; > > +} > > I doubt KVM needs a manual WARN, the RCU deference stuff should yell loudly if > something is missing an rcu_read_lock(). You're right -- removed. > > void kvm_mmu_uninit_tdp_mmu(struct kvm *kvm) > > { > > @@ -178,6 +183,15 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *tdp_mmu_next_root(struct kvm *kvm, > > ((_only_valid) && (_root)->role.invalid))) { \ > > } else > > > > +/* > > + * Iterate over all TDP MMU roots in an RCU read-side critical section. > > + */ > > +#define for_each_tdp_mmu_root_rcu(_kvm, _root, _as_id) \ > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(_root, &_kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_roots, link) \ > > This should just process valid roots: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240801183453.57199-7-seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx Thanks! I've added `|| (_root)->role.invalid)` to the below conditional expression, and I've renamed the macro to for_each_valid_tdp_mmu_root_rcu. > > + if (kvm_lockdep_assert_rcu_read_lock_held() && \ > > + (_as_id >= 0 && kvm_mmu_page_as_id(_root) != _as_id)) { \ > > + } else > > + > > #define for_each_tdp_mmu_root(_kvm, _root, _as_id) \ > > __for_each_tdp_mmu_root(_kvm, _root, _as_id, false) > > > > @@ -1224,6 +1238,27 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn(struct kvm *kvm, > > return ret; > > } > > > > +static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn_lockless( > > + struct kvm *kvm, > > + struct kvm_gfn_range *range, > > + tdp_handler_t handler) > > Please burn all the Google3 from your brain, and code ;-) I indented this way to avoid going past the 80 character limit. I've adjusted it to be more like the other functions in this file. Perhaps I should put `static __always_inline bool` on its own line? > > > + struct kvm_mmu_page *root; > > + struct tdp_iter iter; > > + bool ret = false; > > + > > + rcu_read_lock(); > > + > > + for_each_tdp_mmu_root_rcu(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id) { > > + tdp_root_for_each_leaf_pte(iter, root, range->start, range->end) > > + ret |= handler(kvm, &iter, range); > > + } > > + > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > + > > + return ret; > > +} > > + > > /* > > * Mark the SPTEs range of GFNs [start, end) unaccessed and return non-zero > > * if any of the GFNs in the range have been accessed. > > @@ -1237,28 +1272,30 @@ static bool age_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter, > > { > > u64 new_spte; > > > > +retry: > > /* If we have a non-accessed entry we don't need to change the pte. */ > > if (!is_accessed_spte(iter->old_spte)) > > return false; > > > > if (spte_ad_enabled(iter->old_spte)) { > > - iter->old_spte = tdp_mmu_clear_spte_bits(iter->sptep, > > - iter->old_spte, > > - shadow_accessed_mask, > > - iter->level); > > + iter->old_spte = tdp_mmu_clear_spte_bits_atomic(iter->sptep, > > + shadow_accessed_mask); > > new_spte = iter->old_spte & ~shadow_accessed_mask; > > } else { > > - /* > > - * Capture the dirty status of the page, so that it doesn't get > > - * lost when the SPTE is marked for access tracking. > > - */ > > + new_spte = mark_spte_for_access_track(iter->old_spte); > > + if (__tdp_mmu_set_spte_atomic(iter, new_spte)) { > > + /* > > + * The cmpxchg failed. If the spte is still a > > + * last-level spte, we can safely retry. > > + */ > > + if (is_shadow_present_pte(iter->old_spte) && > > + is_last_spte(iter->old_spte, iter->level)) > > + goto retry; > > Do we have a feel for how often conflicts actually happen? I.e. is it worth > retrying and having to worry about infinite loops, however improbable they may > be? I'm not sure how common this is. I think it's probably better not to retry actually. If the cmpxchg fails, this spte is probably young anyway, so I can just `return true` instead of potentially retrying. This is all best-effort anyway.