kvm: use the correct RCU API
PATCH 1/1 kvm: use the correct RCU API
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts rcu_deference() to srcu_dereference() or family API.
===================================================
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50 [kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2 [kvm]
stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
---
arch/ia64/kvm/kvm-ia64.c +1 -1
@@ -1379,7 +1379,7 @@ static void kvm_release_vm_pages(struct kvm *kvm)int i, j;unsigned long base_gfn; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { memslot = &slots->memslots[i]; base_gfn = memslot->base_gfn;
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h +1 -1
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static inline void kvm_s390_vcpu_set_mem(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)struct kvm_memslots *memslots; idx =srcu_read_lock (&vcpu->kvm->srcu); - memslots =rcu_dereference (vcpu->kvm->memslots); + memslots =kvm_memslots (vcpu->kvm); mem = &memslots->memslots[0 ];
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +4 -3
@@ -792,7 +792,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_hva(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long hva,int retval =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) {struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot = &slots->memslots[i];
@@ -3017,7 +3017,8 @@ unsigned int kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages(struct kvm *kvm)unsigned int nr_pages =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); +for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) nr_pages += slots->memslots[i].npages;
@@ -3292,7 +3293,7 @@ static int count_rmaps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)int i, j, k, idx; idx =srcu_read_lock (&kvm->srcu); - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i <KVM_MEMORY_SLOTS ; ++i) {struct kvm_memory_slot *m = &slots->memslots[i];struct kvm_rmap_desc *d;
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c +1 -1
@@ -1514,7 +1514,7 @@ static gva_t rmode_tss_base(struct kvm *kvm)struct kvm_memslots *slots;gfn_t base_gfn; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); base_gfn = kvm->memslots->memslots[0 ].base_gfn + kvm->memslots->memslots[0 ].npages -3 ;return base_gfn <<PAGE_SHIFT ;
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +2 -2
@@ -2408,7 +2408,7 @@ gfn_t unalias_gfn_instantiation(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)struct kvm_mem_alias *alias;struct kvm_mem_aliases *aliases; - aliases =rcu_dereference (kvm->arch.aliases); + aliases =kvm_aliases (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < aliases->naliases; ++i) { alias = &aliases->aliases[i];
@@ -2427,7 +2427,7 @@ gfn_t unalias_gfn(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)struct kvm_mem_alias *alias;struct kvm_mem_aliases *aliases; - aliases =rcu_dereference (kvm->arch.aliases); + aliases =kvm_aliases (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < aliases->naliases; ++i) { alias = &aliases->aliases[i];
arch/x86/kvm/x86.h +7 -0
@@ -65,4 +65,11 @@ static inline int is_paging(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) return kvm_read_cr0_bits(vcpu, X86_CR0_PG); } +static inline struct kvm_mem_aliases *kvm_aliases (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->arch.aliases, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +#endif
include/linux/kvm_host.h +7 -0
@@ -239,6 +239,13 @@ void kvm_exit(void);void kvm_get_kvm (struct kvm *kvm);void kvm_put_kvm (struct kvm *kvm); +static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +#define HPA_MSB ((sizeof(hpa_t) * 8) - 1)#define HPA_ERR_MASK ((hpa_t)1 << HPA_MSB)static inline int is_error_hpa (hpa_t hpa) {return hpa >>HPA_MSB ; }
virt/kvm/iommu.c +2 -2
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ static int kvm_iommu_map_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)int i, r =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { r =kvm_iommu_map_pages (kvm, &slots->memslots[i]);
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ static int kvm_iommu_unmap_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)int i;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { kvm_iommu_put_pages(kvm, slots->memslots[i].base_gfn,
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +8 -5
@@ -829,7 +829,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_is_error_hva);struct kvm_memory_slot *gfn_to_memslot_unaliased (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; ++i) {struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot = &slots->memslots[i];
@@ -851,7 +851,7 @@ struct kvm_memory_slot *gfn_to_memslot(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)int kvm_is_visible_gfn (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); gfn =unalias_gfn_instantiation (kvm, gfn);for (i =0 ; i <KVM_MEMORY_SLOTS ; ++i) {
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ out:int memslot_id (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot =NULL ; gfn =unalias_gfn (kvm, gfn);
@@ -1979,7 +1979,9 @@ int kvm_io_bus_write(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx, gpa_t addr, int len, const void *val) { int i; -struct kvm_io_bus *bus =rcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx]); +struct kvm_io_bus *bus; + + bus =srcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx], &kvm->srcu);for (i =0 ; i < bus->dev_count; i++)if (!kvm_iodevice_write (bus->devs[i], addr, len, val))return 0 ;
@@ -1991,8 +1993,9 @@ int kvm_io_bus_read(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx, gpa_t addr, int len, void *val) { int i; -struct kvm_io_bus *bus =rcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx]); +struct kvm_io_bus *bus; + bus =srcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx], &kvm->srcu);for (i =0 ; i < bus->dev_count; i++)if (!kvm_iodevice_read (bus->devs[i], addr, len, val))return 0 ;
Quoted 43 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
include/linux/kvm_host.h void kvm_exit(void); · line 248
Quoted 7 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h +7
-0+static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +
This open-codes srcu_dereference(). I guess we need an srcu_dereference_check(). Paul?
btw, perhaps it is possible not to call rcu_dereference from the write paths.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 43 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 42 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Quoted 11 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h void kvm_exit(void); · line 248
Quoted 7 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h +7
-0+static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +This open-codes
srcu_dereference(). I guess we need ansrcu_dereference_check(). Paul?
One is coming in Arnd's sparse-based patchset. It is probably best to open-code this in the meantime and clean up later, but I will double-check with Arnd.
Quoted 2 lines
btw, perhaps it is possible not to call
rcu_dereferencefrom the write paths.
There is an rcu_dereference_protected() on its way to mainline to handle the case where the reference is always protected by a lock. Why not just access it directly? Because if you do that, the sparse-based checks will yell at you.
There is also an rcu_access_pointer() on its way to mainline for cases where you only want to test the pointer itself, not dereference it.
Thanx, Paul
Quoted 44 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 43 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 42 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 10 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h void kvm_exit(void); · line 248
Quoted 7 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h +7
-0+static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +This open-codes
srcu_dereference(). I guess we need ansrcu_dereference_check(). Paul?
rcu_dereference_check() is useful when rcu_dereference(), rcu_dereference_bh(), rcu_dereference_sched() and srcu_dereference() are not appropriate.
I think we don't need srcu_dereference_check() nor rcu_dereference_bh_check() nor rcu_dereference_sched_check().
Quoted 12 lines
One is coming in Arnd's sparse-based patchset. It is probably best to open-code this in the meantime and clean up later, but I will double-check with Arnd.
Quoted 2 lines
btw, perhaps it is possible not to call
rcu_dereferencefrom the write paths.There is an
rcu_dereference_protected()on its way to mainline to handle the case where the reference is always protected by a lock. Why not just access it directly? Because if you do that, the sparse-based checks will yell at you.
Quoted 5 lines
There is also an
rcu_access_pointer()on its way to mainline for cases where you only want to test the pointer itself, not dereference it.Thanx, Paul
I reviewed the code, the functions can be called from the srcu-read-site or update-site, rcu_dereference_check() can simplify the code.
If we use rcu_dereference_protected(), we may need duplicate the functions.
I think there is very small overhead of using rcu_dereference(), so we can call it from write paths.
Thanks,
Lai
Quoted 79 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Quoted 44 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 43 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 42 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1bQuoted 11 lines
Quoted 10 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h void kvm_exit(void); · line 248
Quoted 7 lines
include/linux/kvm_host.h +7
-0+static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +This open-codes
srcu_dereference(). I guess we need ansrcu_dereference_check(). Paul?
rcu_dereference_check()is useful whenrcu_dereference(),rcu_dereference_bh(),rcu_dereference_sched()andsrcu_dereference()are not appropriate.I think we don't need
srcu_dereference_check()norrcu_dereference_bh_check()norrcu_dereference_sched_check().Quoted 15 lines
One is coming in Arnd's sparse-based patchset. It is probably best to open-code this in the meantime and clean up later, but I will double-check with Arnd.
Quoted 2 lines
btw, perhaps it is possible not to call
rcu_dereferencefrom the write paths.There is an
rcu_dereference_protected()on its way to mainline to handle the case where the reference is always protected by a lock. Why not just access it directly? Because if you do that, the sparse-based checks will yell at you.There is also an
rcu_access_pointer()on its way to mainline for cases where you only want to test the pointer itself, not dereference it.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Thanx, Paul
I reviewed the code, the functions can be called from the srcu-read-site or update-site,
rcu_dereference_check()can simplify the code.If we use
rcu_dereference_protected(), we may need duplicate the functions.
We would only use rcu_dereference_protected() in cases where there is no read-side access, so there would be no need for per-read-side versions of this function.
Quoted 2 lines
I think there is very small overhead of using
rcu_dereference(), so we can call it from write paths.
In many cases, this is quite true.
Thanx, Paul
[BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
In reply to Lai JiangshanApplied the patch I just sent and let CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, we can got the following dmesg. And we found that it is because some codes in KVM dereferences srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held or update-side lock held.
It is not hard to fix, the problem is that:
Where is the most proper place to put a srcu_read_lock()?
I can not determine the answer, so I report this bug instead of fixing it.
Thanks.
Lai.
===================================================
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/x86.h:72 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
1 lock held by qemu-system-x86/3027:
#0: (&vcpu->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011b6ff>] vcpu_load+0x1a/0x66 [kvm]
stack backtrace: Pid: 3027, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1-dirty #28 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa0123654>] unalias_gfn_instantiation+0x56/0xaf [kvm] [<ffffffffa01198de>] gfn_to_hva+0x14/0x4c [kvm] [<ffffffffa01199ca>] kvm_write_guest_page+0x2a/0x7f [kvm] [<ffffffffa0119afb>] kvm_write_guest+0x41/0x83 [kvm] [<ffffffffa01243b5>] kvm_write_guest_virt+0x78/0xa1 [kvm] [<ffffffffa012479a>] pio_copy_data+0x46/0x75 [kvm] [<ffffffff81385a0f>] ? sub_preempt_count+0x9/0x83 [<ffffffffa012485a>] complete_pio+0x91/0x1b9 [kvm] [<ffffffffa0128728>] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x93/0xd2b [kvm] [<ffffffffa0128f7a>] ? kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x8e5/0xd2b [kvm] [<ffffffff8106e590>] ? __lock_acquire+0x7b4/0x16d5 [<ffffffffa0117ecd>] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x103/0x97b [kvm] [<ffffffffa011b15b>] ? kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm] [<ffffffff810e6b5e>] ? fget_light+0xf1/0x241 [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6c9e>] ? fget_light+0x231/0x241 [<ffffffff810e6b5e>] ? fget_light+0xf1/0x241 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Re: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 5 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Applied the patch I just sent and let
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, we can got the following dmesg. And we found that it is because some codes in KVM dereferences srcu-protected pointer withoutsrcu_read_lock()held or update-side lock held.
Quoted 7 lines
It is not hard to fix, the problem is that:
Where is the most proper place to put asrcu_read_lock()?I can not determine the answer, so I report this bug instead of fixing it.
I think the else branch in complete_pio() should work. Marcelo?
Longer term I'd like to see the lock taken at the high levels (ioctls, in virt/kvm) and dropped only for guest entry and when we explicitly sleep (hlt emulation).
Note: complete_pio() is gone in the current code.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Re: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 13 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 11 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Applied the patch I just sent and let
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, we can got the following dmesg. And we found that it is because some codes in KVM dereferences srcu-protected pointer withoutsrcu_read_lock()held or update-side lock held.It is not hard to fix, the problem is that:
Where is the most proper place to put asrcu_read_lock()?I can not determine the answer, so I report this bug instead of fixing it.
Quoted 7 lines
I think the else branch in
complete_pio()should work. Marcelo?Longer term I'd like to see the lock taken at the high levels (ioctls, in
virt/kvm) and dropped only for guest entry and when we explicitly sleep (hlt emulation).Note:
complete_pio()is gone in the current code.
Yes, this was fixed by 7fb2ea1e6.
Re: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 15 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Quoted 14 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 11 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Applied the patch I just sent and let
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, we can got the following dmesg. And we found that it is because some codes in KVM dereferences srcu-protected pointer withoutsrcu_read_lock()held or update-side lock held.It is not hard to fix, the problem is that:
Where is the most proper place to put asrcu_read_lock()?I can not determine the answer, so I report this bug instead of fixing it.
I think the else branch in
complete_pio()should work. Marcelo?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Longer term I'd like to see the lock taken at the high levels (ioctls, in
virt/kvm) and dropped only for guest entry and when we explicitly sleep (hlt emulation).Note:
complete_pio()is gone in the current code.Yes, this was fixed by
7fb2ea1e6.
Applied the patch I sent yesterday and let CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y I can get the following dmesg.
Under very simple test, these is no complaint from PROVE_RCU after this patch applied.
More test or reviewing of code are need in future.
----------
Subject: [PATCH] kvm: add missing srcu_read_lock()
I got this dmesg due to srcu_read_lock() is missing in kvm_mmu_notifier_release().
===================================================
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/x86.h:72 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/3100:
#0: (rcu_read_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff810d73dc>] __mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0130a6a>] kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x21/0x5e [kvm]
stack backtrace: Pid: 3100, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc3-22949-gbc8a97a-dirty #2 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106afd9>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa0123a89>] unalias_gfn+0x56/0xab [kvm] [<ffffffffa0119600>] gfn_to_memslot+0x16/0x25 [kvm] [<ffffffffa012ffca>] gfn_to_rmap+0x17/0x6e [kvm] [<ffffffffa01300c1>] rmap_remove+0xa0/0x19d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130649>] kvm_mmu_zap_page+0x109/0x34d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130a7e>] kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x35/0x5e [kvm] [<ffffffffa0122870>] kvm_arch_flush_shadow+0x16/0x22 [kvm] [<ffffffffa01189e0>] kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x15/0x17 [kvm] [<ffffffff810d742c>] __mmu_notifier_release+0x88/0xdf [<ffffffff810d73dc>] ? __mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf [<ffffffff81040848>] ? exit_mm+0xe0/0x115 [<ffffffff810c2cb0>] exit_mmap+0x2c/0x17e [<ffffffff8103c472>] mmput+0x2d/0xd4 [<ffffffff81040870>] exit_mm+0x108/0x115
[...]
---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +4 -0
@@ -341,7 +341,11 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm) {struct kvm *kvm =mmu_notifier_to_kvm (mn); +int idx; + + idx =srcu_read_lock (&kvm->srcu);kvm_arch_flush_shadow (kvm); +srcu_read_unlock (&kvm->srcu, idx); }static const struct mmu_notifier_ops kvm_mmu_notifier_ops = {
Paul E. McKenney
AppliedRe: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 71 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Quoted 15 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Quoted 14 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 11 lines · Lai Jiangshan
Applied the patch I just sent and let
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, we can got the following dmesg. And we found that it is because some codes in KVM dereferences srcu-protected pointer withoutsrcu_read_lock()held or update-side lock held.It is not hard to fix, the problem is that:
Where is the most proper place to put asrcu_read_lock()?I can not determine the answer, so I report this bug instead of fixing it.
I think the else branch in
complete_pio()should work. Marcelo?Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Longer term I'd like to see the lock taken at the high levels (ioctls, in
virt/kvm) and dropped only for guest entry and when we explicitly sleep (hlt emulation).Note:
complete_pio()is gone in the current code.Yes, this was fixed by
7fb2ea1e6.Applied the patch I sent yesterday and let
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=yI can get the following dmesg.Under very simple test, these is no complaint from
PROVE_RCUafter this patch applied.More test or reviewing of code are need in future.
----------
Subject: [PATCH] kvm: add missingsrcu_read_lock()I got this dmesg due to
srcu_read_lock()is missing inkvm_mmu_notifier_release().===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/x86.h:72invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/3100:
#0: (rcu_read_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff810d73dc>]__mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf#1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0130a6a>]kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x21/0x5e[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 3100, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc3-22949-gbc8a97a-dirty #2 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106afd9>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa0123a89>] unalias_gfn+0x56/0xab [kvm] [<ffffffffa0119600>] gfn_to_memslot+0x16/0x25 [kvm] [<ffffffffa012ffca>] gfn_to_rmap+0x17/0x6e [kvm] [<ffffffffa01300c1>] rmap_remove+0xa0/0x19d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130649>] kvm_mmu_zap_page+0x109/0x34d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130a7e>] kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x35/0x5e [kvm] [<ffffffffa0122870>] kvm_arch_flush_shadow+0x16/0x22 [kvm] [<ffffffffa01189e0>] kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x15/0x17 [kvm] [<ffffffff810d742c>] __mmu_notifier_release+0x88/0xdf [<ffffffff810d73dc>] ? __mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf [<ffffffff81040848>] ? exit_mm+0xe0/0x115 [<ffffffff810c2cb0>] exit_mmap+0x2c/0x17e [<ffffffff8103c472>] mmput+0x2d/0xd4 [<ffffffff81040870>] exit_mm+0x108/0x115
Quoted 1 line
[...]
Queued, thank you, Lai!
Thanx, Paul
Quoted 18 lines
Signed-off-by Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +4
-0@@ -341,7 +341,11 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm) {struct kvm *kvm =mmu_notifier_to_kvm (mn); +int idx; + + idx =srcu_read_lock (&kvm->srcu);kvm_arch_flush_shadow (kvm); +srcu_read_unlock (&kvm->srcu, idx); }static const struct mmu_notifier_ops kvm_mmu_notifier_ops = {
Re: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 39 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 37 lines
Subject: [PATCH] kvm: add missing
srcu_read_lock()I got this dmesg due to
srcu_read_lock()is missing inkvm_mmu_notifier_release().===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/x86.h:72invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/3100:
#0: (rcu_read_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff810d73dc>]__mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf#1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0130a6a>]kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x21/0x5e[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 3100, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc3-22949-gbc8a97a-dirty #2 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106afd9>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa0123a89>] unalias_gfn+0x56/0xab [kvm] [<ffffffffa0119600>] gfn_to_memslot+0x16/0x25 [kvm] [<ffffffffa012ffca>] gfn_to_rmap+0x17/0x6e [kvm] [<ffffffffa01300c1>] rmap_remove+0xa0/0x19d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130649>] kvm_mmu_zap_page+0x109/0x34d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130a7e>] kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x35/0x5e [kvm] [<ffffffffa0122870>] kvm_arch_flush_shadow+0x16/0x22 [kvm] [<ffffffffa01189e0>] kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x15/0x17 [kvm] [<ffffffff810d742c>] __mmu_notifier_release+0x88/0xdf [<ffffffff810d73dc>] ? __mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf [<ffffffff81040848>] ? exit_mm+0xe0/0x115 [<ffffffff810c2cb0>] exit_mmap+0x2c/0x17e [<ffffffff8103c472>] mmput+0x2d/0xd4 [<ffffffff81040870>] exit_mm+0x108/0x115Quoted 2 lines
[...]
Quoted 2 lines
Queued, thank you, Lai!
Paul, I'd like to merge this via the kvm tree.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Re: [BUG] kvm: dereference srcu-protected pointer without srcu_read_lock() held
Quoted 39 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 38 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 38 lines
Subject: [PATCH] kvm: add missing
srcu_read_lock()I got this dmesg due to
srcu_read_lock()is missing inkvm_mmu_notifier_release().===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/x86.h:72invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/3100:
#0: (rcu_read_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff810d73dc>]__mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf#1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0130a6a>]kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x21/0x5e[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 3100, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc3-22949-gbc8a97a-dirty #2 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106afd9>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa0123a89>] unalias_gfn+0x56/0xab [kvm] [<ffffffffa0119600>] gfn_to_memslot+0x16/0x25 [kvm] [<ffffffffa012ffca>] gfn_to_rmap+0x17/0x6e [kvm] [<ffffffffa01300c1>] rmap_remove+0xa0/0x19d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130649>] kvm_mmu_zap_page+0x109/0x34d [kvm] [<ffffffffa0130a7e>] kvm_mmu_zap_all+0x35/0x5e [kvm] [<ffffffffa0122870>] kvm_arch_flush_shadow+0x16/0x22 [kvm] [<ffffffffa01189e0>] kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x15/0x17 [kvm] [<ffffffff810d742c>] __mmu_notifier_release+0x88/0xdf [<ffffffff810d73dc>] ? __mmu_notifier_release+0x38/0xdf [<ffffffff81040848>] ? exit_mm+0xe0/0x115 [<ffffffff810c2cb0>] exit_mmap+0x2c/0x17e [<ffffffff8103c472>] mmput+0x2d/0xd4 [<ffffffff81040870>] exit_mm+0x108/0x115[...]
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Queued, thank you, Lai!
Paul, I'd like to merge this via the kvm tree.
Very good, I have removed both of these kvm patches. They are yours! ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Paul E. McKenney
AppliedQuoted 31 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm]
Quoted 8 lines
[<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
I have queued this one up, thank you, Lai!
Thanx, Paul
Quoted 205 lines
Signed-off-by Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]>---
arch/ia64/kvm/kvm-ia64.c +1
-1@@ -1379,7 +1379,7 @@ static void kvm_release_vm_pages(struct kvm *kvm)int i, j;unsigned long base_gfn; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { memslot = &slots->memslots[i]; base_gfn = memslot->base_gfn;arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h +1
-1@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static inline void kvm_s390_vcpu_set_mem(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)struct kvm_memslots *memslots; idx =srcu_read_lock (&vcpu->kvm->srcu); - memslots =rcu_dereference (vcpu->kvm->memslots); + memslots =kvm_memslots (vcpu->kvm); mem = &memslots->memslots[0 ];arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +4
-3@@ -792,7 +792,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_hva(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long hva,int retval =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) {struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot = &slots->memslots[i];@@ -3017,7 +3017,8 @@ unsigned int kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages(struct kvm *kvm)unsigned int nr_pages =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); +for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) nr_pages += slots->memslots[i].npages;@@ -3292,7 +3293,7 @@ static int count_rmaps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)int i, j, k, idx; idx =srcu_read_lock (&kvm->srcu); - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i <KVM_MEMORY_SLOTS ; ++i) {struct kvm_memory_slot *m = &slots->memslots[i];struct kvm_rmap_desc *d;arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c +1
-1@@ -1514,7 +1514,7 @@ static gva_t rmode_tss_base(struct kvm *kvm)struct kvm_memslots *slots;gfn_t base_gfn; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); base_gfn = kvm->memslots->memslots[0 ].base_gfn + kvm->memslots->memslots[0 ].npages -3 ;return base_gfn <<PAGE_SHIFT ;arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +2
-2@@ -2408,7 +2408,7 @@ gfn_t unalias_gfn_instantiation(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)struct kvm_mem_alias *alias;struct kvm_mem_aliases *aliases; - aliases =rcu_dereference (kvm->arch.aliases); + aliases =kvm_aliases (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < aliases->naliases; ++i) { alias = &aliases->aliases[i];@@ -2427,7 +2427,7 @@ gfn_t unalias_gfn(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)struct kvm_mem_alias *alias;struct kvm_mem_aliases *aliases; - aliases =rcu_dereference (kvm->arch.aliases); + aliases =kvm_aliases (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < aliases->naliases; ++i) { alias = &aliases->aliases[i];arch/x86/kvm/x86.h +7
-0@@ -65,4 +65,11 @@ static inline int is_paging(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) return kvm_read_cr0_bits(vcpu, X86_CR0_PG); } +static inline struct kvm_mem_aliases *kvm_aliases (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->arch.aliases, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +#endif include/linux/kvm_host.h +7
-0@@ -239,6 +239,13 @@ void kvm_exit(void);void kvm_get_kvm (struct kvm *kvm);void kvm_put_kvm (struct kvm *kvm); +static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots (struct kvm *kvm) +{ +return rcu_dereference_check (kvm->memslots, +srcu_read_lock_held (&kvm->srcu) + ||lockdep_is_held (&kvm->slots_lock)); +} +#define HPA_MSB ((sizeof(hpa_t) * 8) - 1)#define HPA_ERR_MASK ((hpa_t)1 << HPA_MSB)static inline int is_error_hpa (hpa_t hpa) {return hpa >>HPA_MSB ; }virt/kvm/iommu.c +2
-2@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ static int kvm_iommu_map_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)int i, r =0 ;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { r =kvm_iommu_map_pages (kvm, &slots->memslots[i]);@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ static int kvm_iommu_unmap_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)int i;struct kvm_memslots *slots; - slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); + slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; i++) { kvm_iommu_put_pages(kvm, slots->memslots[i].base_gfn,virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +8
-5@@ -829,7 +829,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_is_error_hva);struct kvm_memory_slot *gfn_to_memslot_unaliased (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);for (i =0 ; i < slots->nmemslots; ++i) {struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot = &slots->memslots[i];@@ -851,7 +851,7 @@ struct kvm_memory_slot *gfn_to_memslot(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)int kvm_is_visible_gfn (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm); gfn =unalias_gfn_instantiation (kvm, gfn);for (i =0 ; i <KVM_MEMORY_SLOTS ; ++i) {@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ out:int memslot_id (struct kvm *kvm,gfn_t gfn) {int i; -struct kvm_memslots *slots =rcu_dereference (kvm->memslots); +struct kvm_memslots *slots =kvm_memslots (kvm);struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot =NULL ; gfn =unalias_gfn (kvm, gfn);@@ -1979,7 +1979,9 @@ int kvm_io_bus_write(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx, gpa_t addr, int len, const void *val) { int i; -struct kvm_io_bus *bus =rcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx]); +struct kvm_io_bus *bus; + + bus =srcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx], &kvm->srcu);for (i =0 ; i < bus->dev_count; i++)if (!kvm_iodevice_write (bus->devs[i], addr, len, val))return 0 ;@@ -1991,8 +1993,9 @@ int kvm_io_bus_read(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx, gpa_t addr, int len, void *val) { int i; -struct kvm_io_bus *bus =rcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx]); +struct kvm_io_bus *bus; + bus =srcu_dereference (kvm->buses[bus_idx], &kvm->srcu);for (i =0 ; i < bus->dev_count; i++)if (!kvm_iodevice_read (bus->devs[i], addr, len, val))return 0 ;
Quoted 42 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 31 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.===================================================
[ INFO: suspiciousrcu_dereference_check()usage. ]
---------------------------------------------------arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:3020invokedrcu_dereference_check()without protection!other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active= 1,debug_locks= 0
2 locks held by qemu-system-x86/8550:
#0: (&kvm->slots_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa011a6ac>]kvm_set_memory_region+0x29/0x50[kvm] #1: (&(&kvm->mmu_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa012262d>]kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xa6/0xe2[kvm]stack backtrace: Pid: 8550, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 2.6.34-rc4-tip-01028-g939eab1 #27 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8106c59e>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb3 [<ffffffffa012f6c1>] kvm_mmu_calculate_mmu_pages+0x44/0x7d [kvm] [<ffffffffa012263e>] kvm_arch_commit_memory_region+0xb7/0xe2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a5d7>] __kvm_set_memory_region+0x636/0x6e2 [kvm] [<ffffffffa011a6ba>] kvm_set_memory_region+0x37/0x50 [kvm] [<ffffffffa015e956>] vmx_set_tss_addr+0x46/0x5a [kvm_intel] [<ffffffffa0126592>] kvm_arch_vm_ioctl+0x17a/0xcf8 [kvm] [<ffffffff810a8692>] ? unlock_page+0x27/0x2c [<ffffffff810bf879>] ? __do_fault+0x3a9/0x3e1 [<ffffffffa011b12f>] kvm_vm_ioctl+0x364/0x38d [kvm]Quoted 9 lines
[<ffffffff81060cfa>] ? up_read+0x23/0x3d [<ffffffff810f3587>] vfs_ioctl+0x32/0xa6 [<ffffffff810f3b19>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x495/0x4db [<ffffffff810e6b2f>] ? fget_light+0xc2/0x241 [<ffffffff810e416c>] ? do_sys_open+0x104/0x116 [<ffffffff81382d6d>] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13 [<ffffffff810f3ba6>] sys_ioctl+0x47/0x6a [<ffffffff810021db>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Quoted 3 lines
I have queued this one up, thank you, Lai!
I'd like this to go through kvm.git as well.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Avi Kivity
AppliedQuoted 5 lines · Lai Jiangshan
The RCU/SRCU API have already changed for proving RCU usage.
I got the following dmesg when PROVE_RCU=y because we used incorrect API. This patch coverts
rcu_deference()tosrcu_dereference()or family API.
Applied, thanks.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function