[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/3] x86: modify_ldt improvement, test, and config option
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/28/2015 08:47 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> >> On 29/07/2015 01:21, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Boris Ostrovsky >>> <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 07/28/2015 01:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Cooper >>>>> <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I suspect that the set_ldt(NULL, 0) call hasn't reached Xen before >>>>>> xen_free_ldt() is attempting to nab back the pages which Xen still has >>>>>> mapped as an LDT. >>>>>> >>>>> I just instrumented it with yet more LSL instructions. I'm pretty >>>>> sure that set_ldt really is clearing at least LDT entry zero. >>>>> Nonetheless the free_ldt call still oopses. >>>>> >>>> Yes, I added some instrumentation to the hypervisor and we definitely >>>> set >>>> LDT to NULL before failing. >>>> >>>> -boris >>> >>> Looking at map_ldt_shadow_page: what keeps shadow_ldt_mapcnt from >>> getting incremented once on each CPU at the same time if both CPUs >>> fault in the same shadow LDT page at the same time? >> >> Nothing, but that is fine. If a page is in use in two vcpus LDTs, it is >> expected to have a type refcount of 2. >> >>> Similarly, what >>> keeps both CPUs from calling get_page_type at the same time and >>> therefore losing track of the page type reference count? >> >> a cmpxchg() loop in the depths of __get_page_type(). >> >>> I don't see why vmalloc or vm_unmap_aliases would have anything to do >>> with this, though. > > > So just for kicks I made lazy_max_pages() return 0 to free vmaps immediately > and the problem went away. > > I also saw this warning, BTW: > > [ 178.686542] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 178.686554] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 16440 at > ./arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h:96 load_mm_ldt+0x70/0x76() > [ 178.686558] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()) Whoops! That should be checking preemptible(), not irqs_disabled(). --Andy _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |