RE: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for oneshot interrupts

From: Liu, Rong L
Date: Wed Aug 10 2022 - 13:34:51 EST

Next message: Wilken Gottwalt: "Re: [PATCH] hwmon: corsair-psu: add reporting of rail mode via debugfs"
Previous message: Dmytro Maluka: "Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] KVM: Fix oneshot interrupts forwarding"
In reply to: Dmytro Maluka: "Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for oneshot interrupts"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu, Rong L
> Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 3:02 PM
> To: Dmytro Maluka <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Christopherson,, Sean
> <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar
> <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave Hansen
> <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; H. Peter Anvin
> <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Eric Auger
> <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>; Alex Williamson
> <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Zhenyu Wang
> <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Dmitry Torokhov
> <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for
> oneshot interrupts
>
> Hi Dmytro,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytro Maluka <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 7:35 AM
> > To: Liu, Rong L <rong.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx>; Christopherson,, Sean
> > <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar
> > <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave Hansen
> > <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; H. Peter Anvin
> > <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Eric Auger
> > <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>; Alex Williamson
> > <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Zhenyu Wang
> > <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> > Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Dmitry Torokhov
> > <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for
> > oneshot interrupts
> >
> > On 7/29/22 10:48 PM, Liu, Rong L wrote:
> > > Hi Dmytro,
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Dmytro Maluka <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 7:08 AM
> > >> To: Liu, Rong L <rong.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx>; Christopherson,, Sean
> > >> <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> > >> kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar
> > >> <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave
> Hansen
> > >> <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; H. Peter Anvin
> > >> <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Eric Auger
> > >> <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>; Alex Williamson
> > >> <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Zhenyu Wang
> > >> <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> > >> Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Dmitry Torokhov
> > >> <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for
> > >> oneshot interrupts
> > >>
> > >> Hi Rong,
> > >>
> > >> On 7/26/22 01:44, Liu, Rong L wrote:
> > >>> Hi Dmytro,
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: Dmytro Maluka <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 8:59 AM
> > >>>> To: Christopherson,, Sean <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini
> > >>>> <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar
> > >>>> <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave
> > Hansen
> > >>>> <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; H. Peter Anvin
> > >>>> <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Eric Auger
> > >>>> <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>; Alex Williamson
> > >>>> <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Liu, Rong L
> <rong.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx>;
> > >>>> Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tomasz Nowicki
> > >>>> <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> > Dmitry
> > >>>> Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx>; Dmytro Maluka
> > <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for
> > >> oneshot
> > >>>> interrupts
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The existing KVM mechanism for forwarding of level-triggered
> > >> interrupts
> > >>>> using resample eventfd doesn't work quite correctly in the case of
> > >>>> interrupts that are handled in a Linux guest as oneshot interrupts
> > >>>> (IRQF_ONESHOT). Such an interrupt is acked to the device in its
> > >>>> threaded irq handler, i.e. later than it is acked to the interrupt
> > >>>> controller (EOI at the end of hardirq), not earlier.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Linux keeps such interrupt masked until its threaded handler
> > finishes,
> > >>>> to prevent the EOI from re-asserting an unacknowledged interrupt.
> > >>>> However, with KVM + vfio (or whatever is listening on the
> > resamplefd)
> > >>>> we don't check that the interrupt is still masked in the guest at the
> > >>>> moment of EOI. Resamplefd is notified regardless, so vfio
> > prematurely
> > >>>> unmasks the host physical IRQ, thus a new (unwanted) physical
> > >> interrupt
> > >>>> is generated in the host and queued for injection to the guest.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The fact that the virtual IRQ is still masked doesn't prevent this
> new
> > >>>> physical IRQ from being propagated to the guest, because:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1. It is not guaranteed that the vIRQ will remain masked by the
> time
> > >>>> when vfio signals the trigger eventfd.
> > >>>> 2. KVM marks this IRQ as pending (e.g. setting its bit in the virtual
> > >>>> IRR register of IOAPIC on x86), so after the vIRQ is unmasked,
> this
> > >>>> new pending interrupt is injected by KVM to the guest anyway.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> There are observed at least 2 user-visible issues caused by those
> > >>>> extra erroneous pending interrupts for oneshot irq in the guest:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1. System suspend aborted due to a pending wakeup interrupt
> from
> > >>>> ChromeOS EC (drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec.c).
> > >>>> 2. Annoying "invalid report id data" errors from ELAN0000
> > touchpad
> > >>>> (drivers/input/mouse/elan_i2c_core.c), flooding the guest
> dmesg
> > >>>> every time the touchpad is touched.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This patch fixes the issue on x86 by checking if the interrupt is
> > >>>> unmasked when we receive irq ack (EOI) and, in case if it's masked,
> > >>>> postponing resamplefd notify until the guest unmasks it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Important notes:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1. It doesn't fix the issue for other archs yet, due to some missing
> > >>>> KVM functionality needed by this patch:
> > >>>> - calling mask notifiers is implemented for x86 only
> > >>>> - irqchip ->is_masked() is implemented for x86 only
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2. It introduces an additional spinlock locking in the resample
> notify
> > >>>> path, since we are no longer just traversing an RCU list of irqfds
> > >>>> but also updating the resampler state. Hopefully this locking
> won't
> > >>>> noticeably slow down anything for anyone.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Instead of using a spinlock waiting for the unmask event, is it
> > possible
> > >> to call
> > >>> resampler notify directly when unmask event happens, instead of
> > >> calling it on
> > >>> EOI?
> > >>
> > >> In this patch, resampler notify is already called directly when
> unmask
> > >> happens: e.g. with IOAPIC, when the guest unmasks the interrupt by
> > >> writing to IOREDTBLx register, ioapic_write_indirect() calls
> > >> kvm_fire_mask_notifiers() which calls irqfd_resampler_mask()
> which
> > >> notifies the resampler. On EOI we postpone it just by setting
> > >> resampler->pending to true, not by waiting. The spinlock is needed
> > >> merely to synchronize reading & updating resampler->pending and
> > >> resampler->masked values between possibly concurrently running
> > >> instances
> > >> of irqfd_resampler_ack() and/or irqfd_resampler_mask().
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Dmytro
> > >>
> > >
> > > I mean the organization of the code. In current implementation,
> > > kvm_ioapic_update_eoi_one() calls kvm_notify_acked_irq(), in your
> > patch, why not
> > > call kvm_notify_acked_irq() from ioapic_write_indirect() (roughly at
> > the same
> > > place where kvm_fire_mask_notifiers is called), instead of calling it
> > from
> > > kvm_ioapic_update_eoi_one, since what your intention here is to
> > notify
> > > vfio of the end of interrupt at the event of ioapic unmask, instead of
> > > EOI?
> >
> > Ah ok, got your point.
> >
> > That was my initial approach in my PoC patch posted in [1]. But then I
> > dropped it, for 2 reasons:
> >
> > 1. Upon feedback from Sean I realized that kvm_notify_acked_irq() is
> > also doing some other important things besides notifying vfio. In
> > particular, in irqfd_resampler_ack() we also de-assert the vIRQ via
> > kvm_set_irq(). In case of IOAPIC it means clearing its bit in IRR
> > register. If we delay that until unmasking, it means that we change
> > the way how KVM emulates the interrupt controller. That would seem
> > inconsistent.
> >
>
> Thanks for clarification. I totally agree that it is important to keep the
> way
> how KVM emulates the interrupt controller.
>
> > Also kvm_notify_acked_irq() notifies the emulated PIT timer via
> > kvm_pit_ack_irq(). I haven't analyzed how exactly that PIT stuff
> > works, so I'm not sure if delaying that until unmask wouldn't cause
> > any unwanted effects.
> >
> > So the idea is to postpone eventfd_signal() only, to fix interaction
> > with vfio while keeping the rest of the KVM behavior intact. Because
> > the KVM job is to emulate the interrupt controller (which it already
> > does correctly), not the external device which is the job of vfio*.
> >
>
> I made a mistake in my last post. I mean just to delay the notification of
> vfio, but keep the rest of the code as intact as possible.
>

I took a closer look at the code and now I got what you mean. I didn't realize
irq_set.set() is actually calls ioapic_set_irq (in ioapic case)

> > 2. kvm_notify_acked_irq() can't be called under ioapic->lock, so in [1]
> > I was unlocking ioapic->lock in ioapic_write_indirect() with a naive
> > assumption that it was as safe as doing it in
> > kvm_ioapic_update_eoi_one(). That was probably racy, and I hadn't
> > figured out how to rework it in a race-free way.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/31420943-8c5f-125c-a5ee-
> > d2fde2700083@xxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > [*] By "vfio" I always mean "vfio or any other resamplefd user".
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dmytro
> >
> > >
> > >>>
> > >>>> Regarding #2, there may be an alternative solution worth
> > considering:
> > >>>> extend KVM irqfd (userspace) API to send mask and unmask
> > >> notifications
> > >>>> directly to vfio/whatever, in addition to resample notifications, to
> > >>>> let vfio check the irq state on its own. There is already locking on
> > >>>> vfio side (see e.g. vfio_platform_unmask()), so this way we would
> > >> avoid
> > >>>> introducing any additional locking. Also such mask/unmask
> > >> notifications
> > >>>> could be useful for other cases.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/31420943-8c5f-125c-a5ee-
> > >>>> d2fde2700083@xxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > >>>> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Dmytro Maluka <dmy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> include/linux/kvm_irqfd.h | 14 ++++++++++++
> > >>>> virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 45
> > >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>> 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_irqfd.h b/include/linux/kvm_irqfd.h
> > >>>> index dac047abdba7..01754a1abb9e 100644
> > >>>> --- a/include/linux/kvm_irqfd.h
> > >>>> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_irqfd.h
> > >>>> @@ -19,6 +19,16 @@
> > >>>> * resamplefd. All resamplers on the same gsi are de-asserted
> > >>>> * together, so we don't need to track the state of each individual
> > >>>> * user. We can also therefore share the same irq source ID.
> > >>>> + *
> > >>>> + * A special case is when the interrupt is still masked at the
> > moment
> > >>>> + * an irq ack is received. That likely means that the interrupt has
> > >>>> + * been acknowledged to the interrupt controller but not
> > >> acknowledged
> > >>>> + * to the device yet, e.g. it might be a Linux guest's threaded
> > >>>> + * oneshot interrupt (IRQF_ONESHOT). In this case notifying
> > through
> > >>>> + * resamplefd is postponed until the guest unmasks the interrupt,
> > >>>> + * which is detected through the irq mask notifier. This prevents
> > >>>> + * erroneous extra interrupts caused by premature re-assert of
> an
> > >>>> + * unacknowledged interrupt by the resamplefd listener.
> > >>>> */
> > >>>> struct kvm_kernel_irqfd_resampler {
> > >>>> struct kvm *kvm;
> > >>>> @@ -28,6 +38,10 @@ struct kvm_kernel_irqfd_resampler {
> > >>>> */
> > >>>> struct list_head list;
> > >>>> struct kvm_irq_ack_notifier notifier;
> > >>>> + struct kvm_irq_mask_notifier mask_notifier;
> > >>>> + bool masked;
> > >>>> + bool pending;
> > >>>> + spinlock_t lock;
> > >>>> /*
> > >>>> * Entry in list of kvm->irqfd.resampler_list. Use for sharing
> > >>>> * resamplers among irqfds on the same gsi.
> > >>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > >>>> index 50ddb1d1a7f0..9ff47ac33790 100644
> > >>>> --- a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > >>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
> > >>>> @@ -75,6 +75,44 @@ irqfd_resampler_ack(struct
> > >> kvm_irq_ack_notifier
> > >>>> *kian)
> > >>>> kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_IRQFD_RESAMPLE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID,
> > >>>> resampler->notifier.gsi, 0, false);
> > >>>>
> > >>>> + spin_lock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> + if (resampler->masked) {
> > >>>> + resampler->pending = true;
> > >>>> + spin_unlock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> + return;
> > >>>> + }
> > >>>> + spin_unlock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> + idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->irq_srcu);
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> + list_for_each_entry_srcu(irqfd, &resampler->list,
> > resampler_link,
> > >>>> + srcu_read_lock_held(&kvm->irq_srcu))
> > >>>> + eventfd_signal(irqfd->resamplefd, 1);
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> + srcu_read_unlock(&kvm->irq_srcu, idx);
> > >>>> +}
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> +static void
> > >>>> +irqfd_resampler_mask(struct kvm_irq_mask_notifier *kimn,
> bool
> > >>>> masked)
> > >>>> +{
> > >>>> + struct kvm_kernel_irqfd_resampler *resampler;
> > >>>> + struct kvm *kvm;
> > >>>> + struct kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd;
> > >>>> + int idx;
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> + resampler = container_of(kimn,
> > >>>> + struct kvm_kernel_irqfd_resampler,
> > mask_notifier);
> > >>>> + kvm = resampler->kvm;
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> + spin_lock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> + resampler->masked = masked;
> > >>>> + if (masked || !resampler->pending) {
> > >>>> + spin_unlock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> + return;
> > >>>> + }
> > >>>> + resampler->pending = false;
> > >>>> + spin_unlock(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->irq_srcu);
> > >>>>
> > >>>> list_for_each_entry_srcu(irqfd, &resampler->list,
> > resampler_link,
> > >>>> @@ -98,6 +136,8 @@ irqfd_resampler_shutdown(struct
> > >>>> kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd)
> > >>>> if (list_empty(&resampler->list)) {
> > >>>> list_del(&resampler->link);
> > >>>> kvm_unregister_irq_ack_notifier(kvm, &resampler-
> > >notifier);
> > >>>> + kvm_unregister_irq_mask_notifier(kvm, resampler-
> > >>>>> mask_notifier.irq,
> > >>>> + &resampler->mask_notifier);
> > >>>> kvm_set_irq(kvm,
> > KVM_IRQFD_RESAMPLE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID,
> > >>>> resampler->notifier.gsi, 0, false);
> > >>>> kfree(resampler);
> > >>>> @@ -367,11 +407,16 @@ kvm_irqfd_assign(struct kvm *kvm,
> > struct
> > >>>> kvm_irqfd *args)
> > >>>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resampler->list);
> > >>>> resampler->notifier.gsi = irqfd->gsi;
> > >>>> resampler->notifier.irq_acked =
> > irqfd_resampler_ack;
> > >>>> + resampler->mask_notifier.func =
> > irqfd_resampler_mask;
> > >>>> + kvm_irq_is_masked(kvm, irqfd->gsi, &resampler-
> > >>>>> masked);
> > >>>> + spin_lock_init(&resampler->lock);
> > >>>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resampler->link);
> > >>>>
> > >>>> list_add(&resampler->link, &kvm-
> > >irqfds.resampler_list);
> > >>>> kvm_register_irq_ack_notifier(kvm,
> > >>>> &resampler->notifier);
> > >>>> + kvm_register_irq_mask_notifier(kvm, irqfd->gsi,
> > >>>> + &resampler->mask_notifier);
> > >>>> irqfd->resampler = resampler;
> > >>>> }
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> 2.37.0.170.g444d1eabd0-goog
> > >>>

Next message: Wilken Gottwalt: "Re: [PATCH] hwmon: corsair-psu: add reporting of rail mode via debugfs"
Previous message: Dmytro Maluka: "Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] KVM: Fix oneshot interrupts forwarding"
In reply to: Dmytro Maluka: "Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: irqfd: Postpone resamplefd notify for oneshot interrupts"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]