On 3/21/25 18:17, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025, Tom Lendacky wrote: >> On 3/18/25 08:47, Tom Lendacky wrote: >>> On 3/18/25 07:43, Tom Lendacky wrote: >>>>>> Very off-the-cuff, but I assume KVM_REQ_UPDATE_PROTECTED_GUEST_STATE just needs >>>>>> to be annotated with KVM_REQUEST_WAIT. >>>>> >>>>> Ok, nice. I wasn't sure if KVM_REQUEST_WAIT would be appropriate here. >>>>> This is much simpler. Let me test it out and resend if everything goes ok. >>>> >>>> So that doesn't work. I can still get an occasional #VMEXIT_INVALID. Let >>>> me try to track down what is happening with this approach... >>> >>> Looks like I need to use kvm_make_vcpus_request_mask() instead of just a >>> plain kvm_make_request() followed by a kvm_vcpu_kick(). > > Ugh, I was going to say "you don't need to do that", but I forgot that > kvm_vcpu_kick() subtly doesn't honor KVM_REQUEST_WAIT. > > Ooof, I'm 99% certain that's causing bugs elsewhere. E.g. arm64's KVM_REQ_SLEEP > uses the same "broken" pattern (LOL, which means that of course RISC-V does too). > In quotes, because kvm_vcpu_kick() is the one that sucks. > > I would rather fix that a bit more directly and obviously. IMO, converting to > smp_call_function_single() isntead of bastardizing smp_send_reschedule() is worth > doing regardless of the WAIT mess. This will allow cleaning up a bunch of > make_request+kick pairs, it'll just take a bit of care to make sure we don't > create a WAIT where one isn't wanted (though those probably should have a big fat > comment anyways). > > Compiled tested only. > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h > index 5de20409bcd9..fd9d9a3ee075 100644 > --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h > @@ -1505,7 +1505,16 @@ bool kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_arch_vcpu_blocking(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_arch_vcpu_unblocking(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > bool kvm_vcpu_wake_up(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > -void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > + > +#ifndef CONFIG_S390 > +void __kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool wait); > + > +static inline void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + __kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu, false); > +} > +#endif > + > int kvm_vcpu_yield_to(struct kvm_vcpu *target); > void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool yield_to_kernel_mode); > > @@ -2253,6 +2262,14 @@ static __always_inline void kvm_make_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > __kvm_make_request(req, vcpu); > } > > +#ifndef CONFIG_S390 > +static inline void kvm_make_request_and_kick(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + kvm_make_request(req, vcpu); > + __kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu, req & KVM_REQUEST_WAIT); > +} > +#endif > + > static inline bool kvm_request_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > return READ_ONCE(vcpu->requests); > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index 201c14ff476f..2a5120e2e6b4 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -3734,7 +3734,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_vcpu_wake_up); > /* > * Kick a sleeping VCPU, or a guest VCPU in guest mode, into host kernel mode. > */ > -void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +void __kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool wait) > { > int me, cpu; > > @@ -3764,12 +3764,12 @@ void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > if (kvm_arch_vcpu_should_kick(vcpu)) { > cpu = READ_ONCE(vcpu->cpu); > if (cpu != me && (unsigned)cpu < nr_cpu_ids && cpu_online(cpu)) > - smp_send_reschedule(cpu); > + smp_call_function_single(cpu, ack_kick, NULL, wait); In general, this approach works. However, this change triggered WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu) && irqs_disabled() && !oops_in_progress); in kernel/smp.c. Call path was: WARNING: CPU: 13 PID: 3467 at kernel/smp.c:652 smp_call_function_single+0x100/0x120 ... Call Trace: <TASK> ? show_regs+0x69/0x80 ? __warn+0x8d/0x130 ? smp_call_function_single+0x100/0x120 ? report_bug+0x182/0x190 ? handle_bug+0x63/0xa0 ? exc_invalid_op+0x19/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20 ? __pfx_ack_kick+0x10/0x10 [kvm] ? __pfx_ack_kick+0x10/0x10 [kvm] ? smp_call_function_single+0x100/0x120 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? migrate_folio_done+0x7f/0x90 __kvm_vcpu_kick+0xa1/0xb0 [kvm] svm_complete_interrupt_delivery+0x93/0xa0 [kvm_amd] svm_deliver_interrupt+0x3e/0x50 [kvm_amd] __apic_accept_irq+0x17f/0x2a0 [kvm] kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic_fast+0x149/0x1b0 [kvm] kvm_arch_set_irq_inatomic+0x9b/0xd0 [kvm] irqfd_wakeup+0xf4/0x230 [kvm] ? __pfx_kvm_set_msi+0x10/0x10 [kvm] __wake_up_common+0x7b/0xa0 __wake_up_locked_key+0x18/0x20 eventfd_write+0xbe/0x1d0 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? security_file_permission+0x134/0x150 vfs_write+0xfb/0x3f0 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? __handle_mm_fault+0x930/0x1040 ksys_write+0x6a/0xe0 __x64_sys_write+0x19/0x20 x64_sys_call+0x16af/0x2140 do_syscall_64+0x6b/0x110 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? count_memcg_events.constprop.0+0x1e/0x40 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? handle_mm_fault+0x18c/0x270 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? irqentry_exit_to_user_mode+0x2f/0x170 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? irqentry_exit+0x1d/0x30 ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 ? exc_page_fault+0x89/0x160 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e Thanks, Tom > } > out: > put_cpu(); > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_vcpu_kick); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__kvm_vcpu_kick); > #endif /* !CONFIG_S390 */ > > int kvm_vcpu_yield_to(struct kvm_vcpu *target) >