lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 RESEND 5/5] KVM: x86: hyperv: implement PV IPI send hypercalls
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 12:18:32PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Using hypercall for sending IPIs is faster because this allows to specify
> any number of vCPUs (even > 64 with sparse CPU set), the whole procedure
> will take only one VMEXIT.
>
> Current Hyper-V TLFS (v5.0b) claims that HvCallSendSyntheticClusterIpi
> hypercall can't be 'fast' (passing parameters through registers) but
> apparently this is not true, Windows always uses it as 'fast' so we need
> to support that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
> ---
> Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt | 8 +++
> arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kvm/trace.h | 42 +++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 1 +
> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 161 insertions(+)

Looks like I forgot to respond to this one, sorry.

> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> index 7b83b176c662..832ea72d43c1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> @@ -4690,3 +4690,11 @@ This capability indicates that KVM supports paravirtualized Hyper-V TLB Flush
> hypercalls:
> HvFlushVirtualAddressSpace, HvFlushVirtualAddressSpaceEx,
> HvFlushVirtualAddressList, HvFlushVirtualAddressListEx.
> +
> +8.19 KVM_CAP_HYPERV_SEND_IPI
> +
> +Architectures: x86
> +
> +This capability indicates that KVM supports paravirtualized Hyper-V IPI send
> +hypercalls:
> +HvCallSendSyntheticClusterIpi, HvCallSendSyntheticClusterIpiEx.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c
> index d1a911132b59..3183cf9bcb63 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c
> @@ -1360,6 +1360,101 @@ static u64 kvm_hv_flush_tlb(struct kvm_vcpu *current_vcpu, u64 ingpa,
> ((u64)rep_cnt << HV_HYPERCALL_REP_COMP_OFFSET);
> }
>
> +static u64 kvm_hv_send_ipi(struct kvm_vcpu *current_vcpu, u64 ingpa, u64 outgpa,
> + bool ex, bool fast)
> +{
> + struct kvm *kvm = current_vcpu->kvm;
> + struct hv_send_ipi_ex send_ipi_ex;
> + struct hv_send_ipi send_ipi;
> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
> + unsigned long valid_bank_mask;
> + u64 sparse_banks[64];
> + int sparse_banks_len, bank, i;
> + struct kvm_lapic_irq irq = {.delivery_mode = APIC_DM_FIXED};
> + bool all_cpus;
> +
> + if (!ex) {
> + if (!fast) {
> + if (unlikely(kvm_read_guest(kvm, ingpa, &send_ipi,
> + sizeof(send_ipi))))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> + sparse_banks[0] = send_ipi.cpu_mask;
> + irq.vector = send_ipi.vector;
> + } else {
> + /* 'reserved' part of hv_send_ipi should be 0 */
> + if (unlikely(ingpa >> 32 != 0))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> + sparse_banks[0] = outgpa;
> + irq.vector = (u32)ingpa;
> + }
> + all_cpus = false;
> + valid_bank_mask = BIT_ULL(0);
> +
> + trace_kvm_hv_send_ipi(irq.vector, sparse_banks[0]);
> + } else {
> + if (unlikely(kvm_read_guest(kvm, ingpa, &send_ipi_ex,
> + sizeof(send_ipi_ex))))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> +
> + trace_kvm_hv_send_ipi_ex(send_ipi_ex.vector,
> + send_ipi_ex.vp_set.format,
> + send_ipi_ex.vp_set.valid_bank_mask);
> +
> + irq.vector = send_ipi_ex.vector;
> + valid_bank_mask = send_ipi_ex.vp_set.valid_bank_mask;
> + sparse_banks_len = bitmap_weight(&valid_bank_mask, 64) *
> + sizeof(sparse_banks[0]);
> +
> + all_cpus = send_ipi_ex.vp_set.format == HV_GENERIC_SET_ALL;
> +
> + if (!sparse_banks_len)
> + goto ret_success;
> +
> + if (!all_cpus &&
> + kvm_read_guest(kvm,
> + ingpa + offsetof(struct hv_send_ipi_ex,
> + vp_set.bank_contents),
> + sparse_banks,
> + sparse_banks_len))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> + }
> +
> + if ((irq.vector < HV_IPI_LOW_VECTOR) ||
> + (irq.vector > HV_IPI_HIGH_VECTOR))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> +
> + if (all_cpus) {
> + kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> + /* We fail only when APIC is disabled */
> + if (!kvm_apic_set_irq(vcpu, &irq, NULL))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;
> + }
> + goto ret_success;
> + }
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(bank, (unsigned long *)&valid_bank_mask,
> + BITS_PER_LONG) {

I think you need exactly 64 rather than BITS_PER_LONG

> +
> + for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&sparse_banks[bank],
> + BITS_PER_LONG) {

ditto

> + u32 vp_index = bank * 64 + i;
> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu =
> + get_vcpu_by_vpidx(kvm, vp_index);
> +
> + /* Unknown vCPU specified */
> + if (!vcpu)
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;

You may have already fired some IPIs, so returning error here without
attempting the remaining vcpus in the request looks inconsistent to me.

I don't see a specified way to report partial success from this
hypercall.

I'd rather continue here.

> +
> + /* We fail only when APIC is disabled */
> + if (!kvm_apic_set_irq(vcpu, &irq, NULL))
> + return HV_STATUS_INVALID_HYPERCALL_INPUT;

Same here.

> + }
> + }
> +
> +ret_success:
> + return HV_STATUS_SUCCESS;
> +}

To my personal taste, this would have been easier to read if the -ex and
non-ex versions were separate functions preparing the arguments (vector
and mask) and calling into a common helper function to send the ipis.

Roman.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-23 17:57    [W:0.231 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site