diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst | 307 |
1 files changed, 307 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..5feb3706a7ae --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst @@ -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/ |