[PATCH v4 22/46] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV P9: Stop handling hcalls in real-mode in the P9 path

Nicholas Piggin npiggin at gmail.com
Wed Mar 24 12:27:09 AEDT 2021


Excerpts from Fabiano Rosas's message of March 24, 2021 8:57 am:
> Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> In the interest of minimising the amount of code that is run in
>> "real-mode", don't handle hcalls in real mode in the P9 path.
>>
>> POWER8 and earlier are much more expensive to exit from HV real mode
>> and switch to host mode, because on those processors HV interrupts get
>> to the hypervisor with the MMU off, and the other threads in the core
>> need to be pulled out of the guest, and SLBs all need to be saved,
>> ERATs invalidated, and host SLB reloaded before the MMU is re-enabled
>> in host mode. Hash guests also require a lot of hcalls to run. The
>> XICS interrupt controller requires hcalls to run.
>>
>> By contrast, POWER9 has independent thread switching, and in radix mode
>> the hypervisor is already in a host virtual memory mode when the HV
>> interrupt is taken. Radix + xive guests don't need hcalls to handle
>> interrupts or manage translations.
>>
>> So it's much less important to handle hcalls in real mode in P9.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com>
>> ---
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
>> index fa7614c37e08..17739aaee3d8 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
>> @@ -1142,12 +1142,13 @@ int kvmppc_pseries_do_hcall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  }
>>
>>  /*
>> - * Handle H_CEDE in the nested virtualization case where we haven't
>> - * called the real-mode hcall handlers in book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S.
>> + * Handle H_CEDE in the P9 path where we don't call the real-mode hcall
>> + * handlers in book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S.
>> + *
>>   * This has to be done early, not in kvmppc_pseries_do_hcall(), so
>>   * that the cede logic in kvmppc_run_single_vcpu() works properly.
>>   */
>> -static void kvmppc_nested_cede(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +static void kvmppc_cede(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  {
>>  	vcpu->arch.shregs.msr |= MSR_EE;
>>  	vcpu->arch.ceded = 1;
>> @@ -1403,9 +1404,15 @@ static int kvmppc_handle_exit_hv(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>  		/* hcall - punt to userspace */
>>  		int i;
>>
>> -		/* hypercall with MSR_PR has already been handled in rmode,
>> -		 * and never reaches here.
>> -		 */
>> +		if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.shregs.msr & MSR_PR)) {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Guest userspace executed sc 1, reflect it back as a
>> +			 * privileged program check interrupt.
>> +			 */
>> +			kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, SRR1_PROGPRIV);
>> +			r = RESUME_GUEST;
>> +			break;
>> +		}
> 
> This patch bypasses sc_1_fast_return so it breaks KVM-PR. L1 loops with
> the following output:
> 
> [    9.503929][ T3443] Couldn't emulate instruction 0x4e800020 (op 19 xop 16)
> [    9.503990][ T3443] kvmppc_exit_pr_progint: emulation at 48f4 failed (4e800020)
> [    9.504080][ T3443] Couldn't emulate instruction 0x4e800020 (op 19 xop 16)
> [    9.504170][ T3443] kvmppc_exit_pr_progint: emulation at 48f4 failed (4e800020)
> 
> 0x4e800020 is a blr after a sc 1 in SLOF.
> 
> For KVM-PR we need to inject a 0xc00 at some point, either here or
> before branching to no_try_real in book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S.

Ah, I didn't know about that PR KVM (I suppose I should test it but I 
haven't been able to get it running in the past).

Should be able to deal with that. This patch probably shouldn't change 
the syscall behaviour like this anyway.

Thanks,
Nick


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list