[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V5 2/6] kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:06:29PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 01:37:04PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote: > > From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > KVM_HC_KICK_CPU allows the calling vcpu to kick another vcpu out of halt > > state. > > > > The presence of these hypercalls is indicated to guest via > > KVM_FEATURE_PV_UNHALT/KVM_CAP_PV_UNHALT. > > > > Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Suzuki Poulose <suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h > > b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h > > index 734c376..9234f13 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h > > @@ -16,12 +16,14 @@ > > #define KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE 0 > > #define KVM_FEATURE_NOP_IO_DELAY 1 > > #define KVM_FEATURE_MMU_OP 2 > > + > > /* This indicates that the new set of kvmclock msrs > > * are available. The use of 0x11 and 0x12 is deprecated > > */ > > #define KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE2 3 > > #define KVM_FEATURE_ASYNC_PF 4 > > #define KVM_FEATURE_STEAL_TIME 5 > > +#define KVM_FEATURE_PV_UNHALT 6 > > > > /* The last 8 bits are used to indicate how to interpret the flags field > > * in pvclock structure. If no bits are set, all flags are ignored. > > @@ -32,6 +34,7 @@ > > #define MSR_KVM_SYSTEM_TIME 0x12 > > > > #define KVM_MSR_ENABLED 1 > > + > > /* Custom MSRs falls in the range 0x4b564d00-0x4b564dff */ > > #define MSR_KVM_WALL_CLOCK_NEW 0x4b564d00 > > #define MSR_KVM_SYSTEM_TIME_NEW 0x4b564d01 > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c > > index 89b02bf..61388b9 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c > > @@ -408,7 +408,8 @@ static int do_cpuid_ent(struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry, > > u32 function, > > (1 << KVM_FEATURE_NOP_IO_DELAY) | > > (1 << KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE2) | > > (1 << KVM_FEATURE_ASYNC_PF) | > > - (1 << KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE_STABLE_BIT); > > + (1 << KVM_FEATURE_CLOCKSOURCE_STABLE_BIT) | > > + (1 << KVM_FEATURE_PV_UNHALT); > > > > if (sched_info_on()) > > entry->eax |= (1 << KVM_FEATURE_STEAL_TIME); > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > index 9cbfc06..bd5ef91 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > @@ -2079,6 +2079,7 @@ int kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext) > > case KVM_CAP_XSAVE: > > case KVM_CAP_ASYNC_PF: > > case KVM_CAP_GET_TSC_KHZ: > > + case KVM_CAP_PV_UNHALT: > > r = 1; > > break; > > case KVM_CAP_COALESCED_MMIO: > > @@ -4913,6 +4914,30 @@ int kvm_hv_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > return 1; > > } > > > > +/* > > + * kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op: Kick a vcpu. > > + * > > + * @apicid - apicid of vcpu to be kicked. > > + */ > > +static void kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op(struct kvm *kvm, int apicid) > > +{ > > + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = NULL; > > + int i; > > + > > + kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) { > > + if (!kvm_apic_present(vcpu)) > > + continue; > > + > > + if (kvm_apic_match_dest(vcpu, 0, 0, apicid, 0)) > > + break; > > + } > > + if (vcpu) { > > + vcpu->pv_unhalted = 1; > > + smp_mb(); > > + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > > + } > > +} > > + > > int kvm_emulate_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > { > > unsigned long nr, a0, a1, a2, a3, ret; > > @@ -4946,6 +4971,10 @@ int kvm_emulate_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > case KVM_HC_VAPIC_POLL_IRQ: > > ret = 0; > > break; > > + case KVM_HC_KICK_CPU: > > + kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op(vcpu->kvm, a0); > > + ret = 0; > > + break; > > default: > > ret = -KVM_ENOSYS; > > break; > > @@ -6174,6 +6203,7 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > !vcpu->arch.apf.halted) > > || !list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done) > > || vcpu->arch.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_SIPI_RECEIVED > > + || vcpu->pv_unhalted > > || atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.nmi_queued) || > > (kvm_arch_interrupt_allowed(vcpu) && > > kvm_cpu_has_interrupt(vcpu)); > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm.h b/include/linux/kvm.h > > index 68e67e5..e822d96 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kvm.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kvm.h > > @@ -558,6 +558,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_pvinfo { > > #define KVM_CAP_PPC_PAPR 68 > > #define KVM_CAP_S390_GMAP 71 > > #define KVM_CAP_TSC_DEADLINE_TIMER 72 > > +#define KVM_CAP_PV_UNHALT 73 > > > > #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h > > index 900c763..433ae97 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h > > @@ -158,6 +158,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu { > > #endif > > > > struct kvm_vcpu_arch arch; > > + int pv_unhalted; > > }; > > > > static inline int kvm_vcpu_exiting_guest_mode(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_para.h b/include/linux/kvm_para.h > > index ff476dd..38226e1 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kvm_para.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_para.h > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ > > #define KVM_HC_MMU_OP 2 > > #define KVM_HC_FEATURES 3 > > #define KVM_HC_PPC_MAP_MAGIC_PAGE 4 > > +#define KVM_HC_KICK_CPU 5 > > > > /* > > * hypercalls use architecture specific > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > index a91f980..d3b98b1 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > @@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ int kvm_vcpu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm > > *kvm, unsigned id) > > vcpu->kvm = kvm; > > vcpu->vcpu_id = id; > > vcpu->pid = NULL; > > + vcpu->pv_unhalted = 0; > > init_waitqueue_head(&vcpu->wq); > > kvm_async_pf_vcpu_init(vcpu); > > > > @@ -1567,6 +1568,9 @@ void kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > prepare_to_wait(&vcpu->wq, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > > > > if (kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu)) { > > + vcpu->pv_unhalted = 0; > > + /* preventing reordering should be enough here */ > > + barrier(); > > Is it always OK to erase the notification, even in case an unrelated > event such as interrupt was the source of wakeup? Note i am only asking whether it is OK to lose a notification, not requesting a change to atomic test-and-clear. It would be nice to have a comment explaining it. > > It would be easier to verify that notifications are not lost with atomic > test_and_clear(pv_unhalted). > > Also x86 specific code should remain in arch/x86/kvm/ > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |