[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v12 6/7] VT-d: introduce update_irte to update irte safely
> From: Gao, Chao > Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 8:30 AM > > We used structure assignment to update irte which was non-atomic when > the > whole IRTE was to be updated. It is unsafe when a interrupt happened > during > update. Furthermore, no bug or warning would be reported when this > happened. > > This patch introduces two variants, atomic and non-atomic, to update irte. > For initialization and release case, the non-atomic variant will be used. for > other cases (such as reprogramming to set irq affinity), the atomic variant > will be used. If the caller requests a atomic update but we can't meet it, we 'a'->'an'. I thought whether above should be updated since two helpers are removed now. But possibly still OK based on purpose of 'atomic' parameter in update_irte. :-) > raise a bug. > > Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > v12: > - use write_atomic in update_irte > - add description to explain why no one won't change the IRTE entry which is > using in update_irte(). Also add assertion to verify it. > - rename the new flag in msi_desc to irte_initialized > - remove two helper function update_irte_{atomic/nonatomic} > > v11: > - Add two variant function to update IRTE. Call the non-atomic one for init > and clear operations. Call the atomic one for other cases. > - Add a new field to indicate the remap_entry associated with msi_desc is > initialized or not. > > v10: > - rename copy_irte_to_irt to update_irte > - remove copy_from_to_irt > - change commmit message and add some comments to illustrate on which > condition update_irte() is safe. > > xen/arch/x86/msi.c | 1 + > xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c | 61 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > xen/include/asm-x86/msi.h | 1 + > 3 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/msi.c b/xen/arch/x86/msi.c > index 3374cd4..d98f400 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/msi.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/msi.c > @@ -579,6 +579,7 @@ static struct msi_desc *alloc_msi_entry(unsigned int > nr) > entry[nr].irq = -1; > entry[nr].remap_index = -1; > entry[nr].pi_desc = NULL; > + entry[nr].irte_initialized = false; > } > > return entry; > diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c > b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c > index a18717b..a7bdbe4 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c > @@ -169,10 +169,55 @@ bool_t __init iommu_supports_eim(void) > return 1; > } > > +/* > + * Assume iremap_lock has been acquired. It is to make sure software will > not > + * change the same IRTE behind us. With this assumption, if only high > qword or > + * low qword in IRTE is to be updated, this function's atomic variant can > + * present an atomic update to VT-d hardware even when cmpxchg16b > + * instruction is not supported. > + */ > +static void update_irte(struct iommu *iommu, struct iremap_entry *entry, > + const struct iremap_entry *new_ire, bool atomic) > +{ > + ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&iommu_ir_ctrl(iommu)->iremap_lock)); > + > + if ( cpu_has_cx16 ) > + { > + __uint128_t ret; > + struct iremap_entry old_ire; > + > + old_ire = *entry; > + ret = cmpxchg16b(entry, &old_ire, new_ire); > + > + /* > + * In the above, we use cmpxchg16 to atomically update the 128-bit > + * IRTE, and the hardware cannot update the IRTE behind us, so > + * the return value of cmpxchg16 should be the same as old_ire. > + * This ASSERT validate it. > + */ > + ASSERT(ret == old_ire.val); > + } > + else > + { > + /* > + * If the caller requests a atomic update but we can't meet it, 'a'->'an' Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |