[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x/kvm: Fix potential deadlock in sigp handling
From: |
Christian Borntraeger |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x/kvm: Fix potential deadlock in sigp handling |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:57:51 +0200 |
FYI, unless I find a better alternative, I plan to go with this patch.
------snip------
[PATCH] s390x/kvm: Fix potential deadlock in sigp handling
If two VCPUs exit at the same time and target each other
with a sigp, both could run into a deadlock as run_on_cpu
on CPU0 will free the BQL when starting the CPU1 target routine.
CPU1 will run its sigp initiater for CPU0 before handling
the run_on_cpu requests, thus resulting in a dead lock.
As all qemu SIGPs are slow path anway we can use a big sigp
lock and allow only one SIGP for the guest at a time. We will
return condition code 2 (BUSY) on contention to the guest.
Reported-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden>
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <address@hidden>
---
target-s390x/kvm.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/target-s390x/kvm.c b/target-s390x/kvm.c
index f348745..a9fa831 100644
--- a/target-s390x/kvm.c
+++ b/target-s390x/kvm.c
@@ -133,6 +133,8 @@ const KVMCapabilityInfo kvm_arch_required_capabilities[] = {
KVM_CAP_LAST_INFO
};
+static QemuMutex qemu_sigp_mutex;
+
static int cap_sync_regs;
static int cap_async_pf;
static int cap_mem_op;
@@ -358,6 +360,8 @@ int kvm_arch_init(MachineState *ms, KVMState *s)
rc = compat_disable_facilities(s, fac_mask, ARRAY_SIZE(fac_mask));
}
+ qemu_mutex_init(&qemu_sigp_mutex);
+
return rc;
}
@@ -1845,6 +1849,11 @@ static int handle_sigp(S390CPU *cpu, struct kvm_run
*run, uint8_t ipa1)
status_reg = &env->regs[r1];
param = (r1 % 2) ? env->regs[r1] : env->regs[r1 + 1];
+ if (qemu_mutex_trylock(&qemu_sigp_mutex)) {
+ ret = SIGP_CC_BUSY;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
switch (order) {
case SIGP_SET_ARCH:
ret = sigp_set_architecture(cpu, param, status_reg);
@@ -1854,7 +1863,9 @@ static int handle_sigp(S390CPU *cpu, struct kvm_run *run,
uint8_t ipa1)
dst_cpu = s390_cpu_addr2state(env->regs[r3]);
ret = handle_sigp_single_dst(dst_cpu, order, param, status_reg);
}
+ qemu_mutex_unlock(&qemu_sigp_mutex);
+out:
trace_kvm_sigp_finished(order, CPU(cpu)->cpu_index,
dst_cpu ? CPU(dst_cpu)->cpu_index : -1, ret);
--
2.5.5
- [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Paolo Bonzini, 2016/09/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Christian Borntraeger, 2016/09/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Paolo Bonzini, 2016/09/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Christian Borntraeger, 2016/09/13
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, David Hildenbrand, 2016/09/15
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Paolo Bonzini, 2016/09/15
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Christian Borntraeger, 2016/09/19
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, David Hildenbrand, 2016/09/19
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [s390] possible deadlock in handle_sigp?, Christian Borntraeger, 2016/09/19
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390x/kvm: Fix potential deadlock in sigp handling,
Christian Borntraeger <=