On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 08:44:23PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> If we were migrated right after __getcpu, but before reading the
> migration_count, we wouldn't notice that we read TSC of a different
> VCPU, nor that KVM's bug made pvti invalid, as only migration_count
> on source VCPU is increased.
> 
> Change vdso instead of updating migration_count on destination.
> 
> Fixes: 0a4e6be9ca17 ("x86: kvm: Revert "remove sched notifier for cross-cpu 
> migrations"")
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com>
> ---
>  Because it we'll get a complete rewrite, this series does not
>  - remove the outdated 'TODO: We can put [...]' comment
>  - use a proper encapsulation for the inner do-while loop
>  - optimize the outer do-while loop
>    (no need to re-read cpu id on version mismatch)
> 
>  arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c b/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> index 30933760ee5f..40d2473836c9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> @@ -99,21 +99,25 @@ static notrace cycle_t vread_pvclock(int *mode)
>                * __getcpu() calls (Gleb).
>                */
>  
> -             pvti = get_pvti(cpu);
> +             /* Make sure migrate_count will change if we leave the VCPU. */
> +             do {
> +                     pvti = get_pvti(cpu);
> +                     migrate_count = pvti->migrate_count;
>  
> -             migrate_count = pvti->migrate_count;
> +                     cpu1 = cpu;
> +                     cpu = __getcpu() & VGETCPU_CPU_MASK;
> +             } while (unlikely(cpu != cpu1));
>  
>               version = __pvclock_read_cycles(&pvti->pvti, &ret, &flags);
>  
>               /*
>                * Test we're still on the cpu as well as the version.
> -              * We could have been migrated just after the first
> -              * vgetcpu but before fetching the version, so we
> -              * wouldn't notice a version change.
> +              * - We must read TSC of pvti's VCPU.
> +              * - KVM doesn't follow the versioning protocol, so data could
> +              *   change before version if we left the VCPU.
>                */
> -             cpu1 = __getcpu() & VGETCPU_CPU_MASK;
> -     } while (unlikely(cpu != cpu1 ||
> -                       (pvti->pvti.version & 1) ||
> +             smp_rmb();
> +     } while (unlikely((pvti->pvti.version & 1) ||
>                         pvti->pvti.version != version ||
>                         pvti->migrate_count != migrate_count));
>  
> -- 
> 2.3.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reviewed-by: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosa...@redhat.com>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to