[PATCH 16/18] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary

Sean Christopherson seanjc at google.com
Fri Mar 26 02:19:55 GMT 2021


Avoid taking mmu_lock for unrelated .invalidate_range_{start,end}()
notifications.  Because mmu_notifier_count must be modified while holding
mmu_lock for write, and must always be paired across start->end to stay
balanced, lock elision must happen in both or none.  To meet that
requirement, add a rwsem to prevent memslot updates across range_start()
and range_end().

For notifiers that disallow blocking, e.g. OOM reaping, simply go down
the slow path of unconditionally acquiring mmu_lock.  The sane
alternative would be to try to acquire the lock and force the notifier
to retry on failure.  But since OOM is currently the _only_ scenario
where blocking is disallowed attempting to optimize a guest that has been
marked for death is pointless.

Note, technically flag-only memslot updates could be allowed in parallel,
but stalling a memslot update for a relatively short amount of time is
not a scalability issue, and this is all more than complex enough.

Based heavily on code from Ben Gardon.

Suggested-by: Ben Gardon <bgardon at google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc at google.com>
---
 include/linux/kvm_host.h |   8 +-
 virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      | 174 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 2 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
index 40ac2d40bb5a..2cc0f87d936e 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -523,6 +523,7 @@ struct kvm {
 	long mmu_notifier_count;
 	unsigned long mmu_notifier_range_start;
 	unsigned long mmu_notifier_range_end;
+	struct rw_semaphore mmu_notifier_slots_lock;
 #endif
 	long tlbs_dirty;
 	struct list_head devices;
@@ -660,8 +661,11 @@ static inline struct kvm_memslots *__kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm, int as_id)
 {
 	as_id = array_index_nospec(as_id, KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM);
 	return srcu_dereference_check(kvm->memslots[as_id], &kvm->srcu,
-			lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock) ||
-			!refcount_read(&kvm->users_count));
+				      lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock) ||
+#if defined(CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER) && defined(KVM_ARCH_WANT_MMU_NOTIFIER)
+				      lockdep_is_held(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock) ||
+#endif
+				      !refcount_read(&kvm->users_count));
 }
 
 static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 0c2aff8a4aa1..9ebc6d3e4a21 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -453,20 +453,56 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 
 typedef bool (*hva_handler_t)(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range);
 
+typedef void (*on_lock_fn_t)(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start,
+			     unsigned long end);
+
 struct kvm_hva_range {
 	unsigned long start;
 	unsigned long end;
 	pte_t pte;
 	hva_handler_t handler;
-	bool caller_locked;
+	on_lock_fn_t on_lock;
+	bool must_lock;
 	bool flush_on_ret;
 	bool may_block;
 };
 
+/*
+ * Use a dedicated stub instead of NULL to indicate that there is no callback
+ * function/handler.  The compiler technically can't guarantee that a real
+ * function will have a non-zero address, and so it will generate code to
+ * check for !NULL, whereas comparing against a stub will be elided at compile
+ * time (unless the compiler is getting long in the tooth, e.g. gcc 4.9).
+ */
+static void kvm_null_fn(void)
+{
+
+}
+#define IS_KVM_NULL_FN(fn) ((fn) == (void *)kvm_null_fn)
+
+
+/* Acquire mmu_lock if necessary.  Returns %true if @handler is "null" */
+static __always_inline bool kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(struct kvm *kvm,
+							   const struct kvm_hva_range *range,
+							   bool *locked)
+{
+	if (*locked)
+		return false;
+
+	*locked = true;
+
+	KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm);
+
+	if (!IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->on_lock))
+		range->on_lock(kvm, range->start, range->end);
+
+	return IS_KVM_NULL_FN(range->handler);
+}
+
 static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm,
 						  const struct kvm_hva_range *range)
 {
-	bool ret = false, locked = range->caller_locked;
+	bool ret = false, locked = false;
 	struct kvm_gfn_range gfn_range;
 	struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
 	struct kvm_memslots *slots;
@@ -474,6 +510,10 @@ static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm,
 
 	idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->srcu);
 
+	if (range->must_lock &&
+	    kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(kvm, range, &locked))
+		goto out_unlock;
+
 	for (i = 0; i < KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM; i++) {
 		slots = __kvm_memslots(kvm, i);
 		kvm_for_each_memslot(slot, slots) {
@@ -502,10 +542,9 @@ static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm,
 			gfn_range.end = hva_to_gfn_memslot(hva_end + PAGE_SIZE - 1, slot);
 			gfn_range.slot = slot;
 
-			if (!locked) {
-				locked = true;
-				KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm);
-			}
+			if (kvm_mmu_lock_and_check_handler(kvm, range, &locked))
+				goto out_unlock;
+
 			ret |= range->handler(kvm, &gfn_range);
 		}
 	}
@@ -513,7 +552,8 @@ static __always_inline int __kvm_handle_hva_range(struct kvm *kvm,
 	if (range->flush_on_ret && (ret || kvm->tlbs_dirty))
 		kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
 
-	if (locked && !range->caller_locked)
+out_unlock:
+	if (locked)
 		KVM_MMU_UNLOCK(kvm);
 
 	srcu_read_unlock(&kvm->srcu, idx);
@@ -534,10 +574,12 @@ static __always_inline int kvm_handle_hva_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 		.end		= end,
 		.pte		= pte,
 		.handler	= handler,
-		.caller_locked	= false,
+		.on_lock	= (void *)kvm_null_fn,
+		.must_lock	= false,
 		.flush_on_ret	= true,
 		.may_block	= false,
 	};
+
 	return __kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &range);
 }
 
@@ -552,7 +594,8 @@ static __always_inline int kvm_handle_hva_range_no_flush(struct mmu_notifier *mn
 		.end		= end,
 		.pte		= __pte(0),
 		.handler	= handler,
-		.caller_locked	= false,
+		.on_lock	= (void *)kvm_null_fn,
+		.must_lock	= false,
 		.flush_on_ret	= false,
 		.may_block	= false,
 	};
@@ -569,23 +612,9 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_change_pte(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 	kvm_handle_hva_range(mn, address, address + 1, pte, kvm_set_spte_gfn);
 }
 
-static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
-					const struct mmu_notifier_range *range)
+static void kvm_inc_notifier_count(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start,
+				   unsigned long end)
 {
-	struct kvm *kvm = mmu_notifier_to_kvm(mn);
-	const struct kvm_hva_range hva_range = {
-		.start		= range->start,
-		.end		= range->end,
-		.pte		= __pte(0),
-		.handler	= kvm_unmap_gfn_range,
-		.caller_locked	= true,
-		.flush_on_ret	= true,
-		.may_block	= mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range),
-	};
-
-	trace_kvm_unmap_hva_range(range->start, range->end);
-
-	KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm);
 	/*
 	 * The count increase must become visible at unlock time as no
 	 * spte can be established without taking the mmu_lock and
@@ -593,8 +622,8 @@ static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 	 */
 	kvm->mmu_notifier_count++;
 	if (likely(kvm->mmu_notifier_count == 1)) {
-		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_start = range->start;
-		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_end = range->end;
+		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_start = start;
+		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_end = end;
 	} else {
 		/*
 		 * Fully tracking multiple concurrent ranges has dimishing
@@ -606,24 +635,54 @@ static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 		 * complete.
 		 */
 		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_start =
-			min(kvm->mmu_notifier_range_start, range->start);
+			min(kvm->mmu_notifier_range_start, start);
 		kvm->mmu_notifier_range_end =
-			max(kvm->mmu_notifier_range_end, range->end);
+			max(kvm->mmu_notifier_range_end, end);
 	}
-
-	__kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &hva_range);
-
-	KVM_MMU_UNLOCK(kvm);
-
-	return 0;
 }
 
-static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
+static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 					const struct mmu_notifier_range *range)
 {
+	bool blockable = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range);
 	struct kvm *kvm = mmu_notifier_to_kvm(mn);
+	const struct kvm_hva_range hva_range = {
+		.start		= range->start,
+		.end		= range->end,
+		.pte		= __pte(0),
+		.handler	= kvm_unmap_gfn_range,
+		.on_lock	= kvm_inc_notifier_count,
+		.must_lock	= !blockable,
+		.flush_on_ret	= true,
+		.may_block	= blockable,
+	};
 
-	KVM_MMU_LOCK(kvm);
+	trace_kvm_unmap_hva_range(range->start, range->end);
+
+	/*
+	 * Prevent memslot modification between range_start() and range_end()
+	 * so that conditionally locking provides the same result in both
+	 * functions.  Without that guarantee, the mmu_notifier_count
+	 * adjustments will be imbalanced.
+	 *
+	 * Skip the memslot-lookup lock elision (set @must_lock above) to avoid
+	 * having to take the semaphore on non-blockable calls, e.g. OOM kill.
+	 * The complexity required to handle conditional locking for this case
+	 * is not worth the marginal benefits, the VM is likely doomed anyways.
+	 *
+	 * Pairs with the unlock in range_end().
+	 */
+	if (blockable)
+		down_read(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
+
+	__kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &hva_range);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void kvm_dec_notifier_count(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start,
+				   unsigned long end)
+{
 	/*
 	 * This sequence increase will notify the kvm page fault that
 	 * the page that is going to be mapped in the spte could have
@@ -637,7 +696,29 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
 	 * in conjunction with the smp_rmb in mmu_notifier_retry().
 	 */
 	kvm->mmu_notifier_count--;
-	KVM_MMU_UNLOCK(kvm);
+}
+
+static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
+					const struct mmu_notifier_range *range)
+{
+	bool blockable = mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range);
+	struct kvm *kvm = mmu_notifier_to_kvm(mn);
+	const struct kvm_hva_range hva_range = {
+		.start		= range->start,
+		.end		= range->end,
+		.pte		= __pte(0),
+		.handler	= (void *)kvm_null_fn,
+		.on_lock	= kvm_dec_notifier_count,
+		.must_lock	= !blockable,
+		.flush_on_ret	= true,
+		.may_block	= blockable,
+	};
+
+	__kvm_handle_hva_range(kvm, &hva_range);
+
+	/* Pairs with the lock in range_start(). */
+	if (blockable)
+		up_read(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
 
 	BUG_ON(kvm->mmu_notifier_count < 0);
 }
@@ -709,6 +790,8 @@ static const struct mmu_notifier_ops kvm_mmu_notifier_ops = {
 
 static int kvm_init_mmu_notifier(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
+	init_rwsem(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
+
 	kvm->mmu_notifier.ops = &kvm_mmu_notifier_ops;
 	return mmu_notifier_register(&kvm->mmu_notifier, current->mm);
 }
@@ -971,6 +1054,15 @@ static void kvm_destroy_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
 	kvm_coalesced_mmio_free(kvm);
 #if defined(CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER) && defined(KVM_ARCH_WANT_MMU_NOTIFIER)
 	mmu_notifier_unregister(&kvm->mmu_notifier, kvm->mm);
+	/*
+	 * Reset the lock used to prevent memslot updates between MMU notifier
+	 * range_start and range_end.  At this point no more MMU notifiers will
+	 * run, but the lock could still be held if KVM's notifier was removed
+	 * between range_start and range_end.  No threads can be waiting on the
+	 * lock as the last reference on KVM has been dropped.  If the lock is
+	 * still held, freeing memslots will deadlock.
+	 */
+	init_rwsem(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
 #else
 	kvm_arch_flush_shadow_all(kvm);
 #endif
@@ -1222,7 +1314,13 @@ static struct kvm_memslots *install_new_memslots(struct kvm *kvm,
 	WARN_ON(gen & KVM_MEMSLOT_GEN_UPDATE_IN_PROGRESS);
 	slots->generation = gen | KVM_MEMSLOT_GEN_UPDATE_IN_PROGRESS;
 
+#if defined(CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER) && defined(KVM_ARCH_WANT_MMU_NOTIFIER)
+	down_write(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
+#endif
 	rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots[as_id], slots);
+#if defined(CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER) && defined(KVM_ARCH_WANT_MMU_NOTIFIER)
+	up_write(&kvm->mmu_notifier_slots_lock);
+#endif
 	synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.31.0.291.g576ba9dcdaf-goog




More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list