|
@@ -0,0 +1,307 @@
|
|
|
+=================
|
|
|
+KVM VCPU Requests
|
|
|
+=================
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Overview
|
|
|
+========
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM supports an internal API enabling threads to request a VCPU thread to
|
|
|
+perform some activity. For example, a thread may request a VCPU to flush
|
|
|
+its TLB with a VCPU request. The API consists of the following functions::
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* Check if any requests are pending for VCPU @vcpu. */
|
|
|
+ bool kvm_request_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* Check if VCPU @vcpu has request @req pending. */
|
|
|
+ bool kvm_test_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* Clear request @req for VCPU @vcpu. */
|
|
|
+ void kvm_clear_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /*
|
|
|
+ * Check if VCPU @vcpu has request @req pending. When the request is
|
|
|
+ * pending it will be cleared and a memory barrier, which pairs with
|
|
|
+ * another in kvm_make_request(), will be issued.
|
|
|
+ */
|
|
|
+ bool kvm_check_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /*
|
|
|
+ * Make request @req of VCPU @vcpu. Issues a memory barrier, which pairs
|
|
|
+ * with another in kvm_check_request(), prior to setting the request.
|
|
|
+ */
|
|
|
+ void kvm_make_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* Make request @req of all VCPUs of the VM with struct kvm @kvm. */
|
|
|
+ bool kvm_make_all_cpus_request(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int req);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Typically a requester wants the VCPU to perform the activity as soon
|
|
|
+as possible after making the request. This means most requests
|
|
|
+(kvm_make_request() calls) are followed by a call to kvm_vcpu_kick(),
|
|
|
+and kvm_make_all_cpus_request() has the kicking of all VCPUs built
|
|
|
+into it.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU Kicks
|
|
|
+----------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+The goal of a VCPU kick is to bring a VCPU thread out of guest mode in
|
|
|
+order to perform some KVM maintenance. To do so, an IPI is sent, forcing
|
|
|
+a guest mode exit. However, a VCPU thread may not be in guest mode at the
|
|
|
+time of the kick. Therefore, depending on the mode and state of the VCPU
|
|
|
+thread, there are two other actions a kick may take. All three actions
|
|
|
+are listed below:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+1) Send an IPI. This forces a guest mode exit.
|
|
|
+2) Waking a sleeping VCPU. Sleeping VCPUs are VCPU threads outside guest
|
|
|
+ mode that wait on waitqueues. Waking them removes the threads from
|
|
|
+ the waitqueues, allowing the threads to run again. This behavior
|
|
|
+ may be suppressed, see KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP below.
|
|
|
+3) Nothing. When the VCPU is not in guest mode and the VCPU thread is not
|
|
|
+ sleeping, then there is nothing to do.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU Mode
|
|
|
+---------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPUs have a mode state, ``vcpu->mode``, that is used to track whether the
|
|
|
+guest is running in guest mode or not, as well as some specific
|
|
|
+outside guest mode states. The architecture may use ``vcpu->mode`` to
|
|
|
+ensure VCPU requests are seen by VCPUs (see "Ensuring Requests Are Seen"),
|
|
|
+as well as to avoid sending unnecessary IPIs (see "IPI Reduction"), and
|
|
|
+even to ensure IPI acknowledgements are waited upon (see "Waiting for
|
|
|
+Acknowledgements"). The following modes are defined:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+OUTSIDE_GUEST_MODE
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The VCPU thread is outside guest mode.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+IN_GUEST_MODE
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The VCPU thread is in guest mode.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+EXITING_GUEST_MODE
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The VCPU thread is transitioning from IN_GUEST_MODE to
|
|
|
+ OUTSIDE_GUEST_MODE.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+READING_SHADOW_PAGE_TABLES
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The VCPU thread is outside guest mode, but it wants the sender of
|
|
|
+ certain VCPU requests, namely KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH, to wait until the VCPU
|
|
|
+ thread is done reading the page tables.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU Request Internals
|
|
|
+======================
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU requests are simply bit indices of the ``vcpu->requests`` bitmap.
|
|
|
+This means general bitops, like those documented in [atomic-ops]_ could
|
|
|
+also be used, e.g. ::
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ clear_bit(KVM_REQ_UNHALT & KVM_REQUEST_MASK, &vcpu->requests);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+However, VCPU request users should refrain from doing so, as it would
|
|
|
+break the abstraction. The first 8 bits are reserved for architecture
|
|
|
+independent requests, all additional bits are available for architecture
|
|
|
+dependent requests.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Architecture Independent Requests
|
|
|
+---------------------------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ KVM's common MMU notifier may need to flush all of a guest's TLB
|
|
|
+ entries, calling kvm_flush_remote_tlbs() to do so. Architectures that
|
|
|
+ choose to use the common kvm_flush_remote_tlbs() implementation will
|
|
|
+ need to handle this VCPU request.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQ_MMU_RELOAD
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ When shadow page tables are used and memory slots are removed it's
|
|
|
+ necessary to inform each VCPU to completely refresh the tables. This
|
|
|
+ request is used for that.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQ_PENDING_TIMER
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ This request may be made from a timer handler run on the host on behalf
|
|
|
+ of a VCPU. It informs the VCPU thread to inject a timer interrupt.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQ_UNHALT
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ This request may be made from the KVM common function kvm_vcpu_block(),
|
|
|
+ which is used to emulate an instruction that causes a CPU to halt until
|
|
|
+ one of an architectural specific set of events and/or interrupts is
|
|
|
+ received (determined by checking kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable()). When that
|
|
|
+ event or interrupt arrives kvm_vcpu_block() makes the request. This is
|
|
|
+ in contrast to when kvm_vcpu_block() returns due to any other reason,
|
|
|
+ such as a pending signal, which does not indicate the VCPU's halt
|
|
|
+ emulation should stop, and therefore does not make the request.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQUEST_MASK
|
|
|
+----------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU requests should be masked by KVM_REQUEST_MASK before using them with
|
|
|
+bitops. This is because only the lower 8 bits are used to represent the
|
|
|
+request's number. The upper bits are used as flags. Currently only two
|
|
|
+flags are defined.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU Request Flags
|
|
|
+------------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ This flag is applied to requests that only need immediate attention
|
|
|
+ from VCPUs running in guest mode. That is, sleeping VCPUs do not need
|
|
|
+ to be awaken for these requests. Sleeping VCPUs will handle the
|
|
|
+ requests when they are awaken later for some other reason.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+KVM_REQUEST_WAIT
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ When requests with this flag are made with kvm_make_all_cpus_request(),
|
|
|
+ then the caller will wait for each VCPU to acknowledge its IPI before
|
|
|
+ proceeding. This flag only applies to VCPUs that would receive IPIs.
|
|
|
+ If, for example, the VCPU is sleeping, so no IPI is necessary, then
|
|
|
+ the requesting thread does not wait. This means that this flag may be
|
|
|
+ safely combined with KVM_REQUEST_NO_WAKEUP. See "Waiting for
|
|
|
+ Acknowledgements" for more information about requests with
|
|
|
+ KVM_REQUEST_WAIT.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU Requests with Associated State
|
|
|
+===================================
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Requesters that want the receiving VCPU to handle new state need to ensure
|
|
|
+the newly written state is observable to the receiving VCPU thread's CPU
|
|
|
+by the time it observes the request. This means a write memory barrier
|
|
|
+must be inserted after writing the new state and before setting the VCPU
|
|
|
+request bit. Additionally, on the receiving VCPU thread's side, a
|
|
|
+corresponding read barrier must be inserted after reading the request bit
|
|
|
+and before proceeding to read the new state associated with it. See
|
|
|
+scenario 3, Message and Flag, of [lwn-mb]_ and the kernel documentation
|
|
|
+[memory-barriers]_.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+The pair of functions, kvm_check_request() and kvm_make_request(), provide
|
|
|
+the memory barriers, allowing this requirement to be handled internally by
|
|
|
+the API.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Ensuring Requests Are Seen
|
|
|
+==========================
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+When making requests to VCPUs, we want to avoid the receiving VCPU
|
|
|
+executing in guest mode for an arbitrary long time without handling the
|
|
|
+request. We can be sure this won't happen as long as we ensure the VCPU
|
|
|
+thread checks kvm_request_pending() before entering guest mode and that a
|
|
|
+kick will send an IPI to force an exit from guest mode when necessary.
|
|
|
+Extra care must be taken to cover the period after the VCPU thread's last
|
|
|
+kvm_request_pending() check and before it has entered guest mode, as kick
|
|
|
+IPIs will only trigger guest mode exits for VCPU threads that are in guest
|
|
|
+mode or at least have already disabled interrupts in order to prepare to
|
|
|
+enter guest mode. This means that an optimized implementation (see "IPI
|
|
|
+Reduction") must be certain when it's safe to not send the IPI. One
|
|
|
+solution, which all architectures except s390 apply, is to:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+- set ``vcpu->mode`` to IN_GUEST_MODE between disabling the interrupts and
|
|
|
+ the last kvm_request_pending() check;
|
|
|
+- enable interrupts atomically when entering the guest.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+This solution also requires memory barriers to be placed carefully in both
|
|
|
+the requesting thread and the receiving VCPU. With the memory barriers we
|
|
|
+can exclude the possibility of a VCPU thread observing
|
|
|
+!kvm_request_pending() on its last check and then not receiving an IPI for
|
|
|
+the next request made of it, even if the request is made immediately after
|
|
|
+the check. This is done by way of the Dekker memory barrier pattern
|
|
|
+(scenario 10 of [lwn-mb]_). As the Dekker pattern requires two variables,
|
|
|
+this solution pairs ``vcpu->mode`` with ``vcpu->requests``. Substituting
|
|
|
+them into the pattern gives::
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ CPU1 CPU2
|
|
|
+ ================= =================
|
|
|
+ local_irq_disable();
|
|
|
+ WRITE_ONCE(vcpu->mode, IN_GUEST_MODE); kvm_make_request(REQ, vcpu);
|
|
|
+ smp_mb(); smp_mb();
|
|
|
+ if (kvm_request_pending(vcpu)) { if (READ_ONCE(vcpu->mode) ==
|
|
|
+ IN_GUEST_MODE) {
|
|
|
+ ...abort guest entry... ...send IPI...
|
|
|
+ } }
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+As stated above, the IPI is only useful for VCPU threads in guest mode or
|
|
|
+that have already disabled interrupts. This is why this specific case of
|
|
|
+the Dekker pattern has been extended to disable interrupts before setting
|
|
|
+``vcpu->mode`` to IN_GUEST_MODE. WRITE_ONCE() and READ_ONCE() are used to
|
|
|
+pedantically implement the memory barrier pattern, guaranteeing the
|
|
|
+compiler doesn't interfere with ``vcpu->mode``'s carefully planned
|
|
|
+accesses.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+IPI Reduction
|
|
|
+-------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+As only one IPI is needed to get a VCPU to check for any/all requests,
|
|
|
+then they may be coalesced. This is easily done by having the first IPI
|
|
|
+sending kick also change the VCPU mode to something !IN_GUEST_MODE. The
|
|
|
+transitional state, EXITING_GUEST_MODE, is used for this purpose.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Waiting for Acknowledgements
|
|
|
+----------------------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Some requests, those with the KVM_REQUEST_WAIT flag set, require IPIs to
|
|
|
+be sent, and the acknowledgements to be waited upon, even when the target
|
|
|
+VCPU threads are in modes other than IN_GUEST_MODE. For example, one case
|
|
|
+is when a target VCPU thread is in READING_SHADOW_PAGE_TABLES mode, which
|
|
|
+is set after disabling interrupts. To support these cases, the
|
|
|
+KVM_REQUEST_WAIT flag changes the condition for sending an IPI from
|
|
|
+checking that the VCPU is IN_GUEST_MODE to checking that it is not
|
|
|
+OUTSIDE_GUEST_MODE.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Request-less VCPU Kicks
|
|
|
+-----------------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+As the determination of whether or not to send an IPI depends on the
|
|
|
+two-variable Dekker memory barrier pattern, then it's clear that
|
|
|
+request-less VCPU kicks are almost never correct. Without the assurance
|
|
|
+that a non-IPI generating kick will still result in an action by the
|
|
|
+receiving VCPU, as the final kvm_request_pending() check does for
|
|
|
+request-accompanying kicks, then the kick may not do anything useful at
|
|
|
+all. If, for instance, a request-less kick was made to a VCPU that was
|
|
|
+just about to set its mode to IN_GUEST_MODE, meaning no IPI is sent, then
|
|
|
+the VCPU thread may continue its entry without actually having done
|
|
|
+whatever it was the kick was meant to initiate.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+One exception is x86's posted interrupt mechanism. In this case, however,
|
|
|
+even the request-less VCPU kick is coupled with the same
|
|
|
+local_irq_disable() + smp_mb() pattern described above; the ON bit
|
|
|
+(Outstanding Notification) in the posted interrupt descriptor takes the
|
|
|
+role of ``vcpu->requests``. When sending a posted interrupt, PIR.ON is
|
|
|
+set before reading ``vcpu->mode``; dually, in the VCPU thread,
|
|
|
+vmx_sync_pir_to_irr() reads PIR after setting ``vcpu->mode`` to
|
|
|
+IN_GUEST_MODE.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Additional Considerations
|
|
|
+=========================
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Sleeping VCPUs
|
|
|
+--------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+VCPU threads may need to consider requests before and/or after calling
|
|
|
+functions that may put them to sleep, e.g. kvm_vcpu_block(). Whether they
|
|
|
+do or not, and, if they do, which requests need consideration, is
|
|
|
+architecture dependent. kvm_vcpu_block() calls kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable()
|
|
|
+to check if it should awaken. One reason to do so is to provide
|
|
|
+architectures a function where requests may be checked if necessary.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Clearing Requests
|
|
|
+-----------------
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Generally it only makes sense for the receiving VCPU thread to clear a
|
|
|
+request. However, in some circumstances, such as when the requesting
|
|
|
+thread and the receiving VCPU thread are executed serially, such as when
|
|
|
+they are the same thread, or when they are using some form of concurrency
|
|
|
+control to temporarily execute synchronously, then it's possible to know
|
|
|
+that the request may be cleared immediately, rather than waiting for the
|
|
|
+receiving VCPU thread to handle the request in VCPU RUN. The only current
|
|
|
+examples of this are kvm_vcpu_block() calls made by VCPUs to block
|
|
|
+themselves. A possible side-effect of that call is to make the
|
|
|
+KVM_REQ_UNHALT request, which may then be cleared immediately when the
|
|
|
+VCPU returns from the call.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+References
|
|
|
+==========
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+.. [atomic-ops] Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst
|
|
|
+.. [memory-barriers] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
|
|
|
+.. [lwn-mb] https://lwn.net/Articles/573436/
|