Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v10 6/6] ppc: spapr: Handle "ibm, nmi-register" and "ibm, nmi-interlock" RTAS calls

[David Gibson]

On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 10:49:05AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thursday 04 July 2019 06:42 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 02:30:31PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wednesday 03 July 2019 08:50 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 04:10:08PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tuesday 02 July 2019 09:41 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 02:51:38PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote:
> >>>>>> This patch adds support in QEMU to handle "ibm,nmi-register"
> >>>>>> and "ibm,nmi-interlock" RTAS calls and sets the default
> >>>>>> value of SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE to SPAPR_CAP_ON for machine
> >>>>>> type 4.0.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The machine check notification address is saved when the
> >>>>>> OS issues "ibm,nmi-register" RTAS call.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This patch also handles the case when multiple processors
> >>>>>> experience machine check at or about the same time by
> >>>>>> handling "ibm,nmi-interlock" call. In such cases, as per
> >>>>>> PAPR, subsequent processors serialize waiting for the first
> >>>>>> processor to issue the "ibm,nmi-interlock" call. The second
> >>>>>> processor that also received a machine check error waits
> >>>>>> till the first processor is done reading the error log.
> >>>>>> The first processor issues "ibm,nmi-interlock" call
> >>>>>> when the error log is consumed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Aravinda Prasad <address@hidden>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>  hw/ppc/spapr.c         |    6 ++++-
> >>>>>>  hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c    |   63 
> >>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>>  include/hw/ppc/spapr.h |    5 +++-
> >>>>>>  3 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> >>>>>> index 3d6d139..213d493 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> >>>>>> @@ -2946,6 +2946,9 @@ static void spapr_machine_init(MachineState 
> >>>>>> *machine)
> >>>>>>          /* Create the error string for live migration blocker */
> >>>>>>          error_setg(&spapr->fwnmi_migration_blocker,
> >>>>>>                  "Live migration not supported during machine check 
> >>>>>> handling");
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +        /* Register ibm,nmi-register and ibm,nmi-interlock RTAS calls 
> >>>>>> */
> >>>>>> +        spapr_fwnmi_register();
> >>>>>>      }
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>>      spapr->rtas_blob = g_malloc(spapr->rtas_size);
> >>>>>> @@ -4408,7 +4411,7 @@ static void spapr_machine_class_init(ObjectClass 
> >>>>>> *oc, void *data)
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_NESTED_KVM_HV] = SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_LARGE_DECREMENTER] = 
> >>>>>> SPAPR_CAP_ON;
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_CCF_ASSIST] = SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> >>>>>> -    smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE] = SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> >>>>>> +    smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE] = SPAPR_CAP_ON;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Turning this on by default really isn't ok if it stops you running TCG
> >>>>> guests at all.
> >>>>
> >>>> If so this can be "off" by default until TCG is supported.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>      spapr_caps_add_properties(smc, &error_abort);
> >>>>>>      smc->irq = &spapr_irq_dual;
> >>>>>>      smc->dr_phb_enabled = true;
> >>>>>> @@ -4512,6 +4515,7 @@ static void 
> >>>>>> spapr_machine_3_1_class_options(MachineClass *mc)
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_SBBC] = SPAPR_CAP_BROKEN;
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_IBS] = SPAPR_CAP_BROKEN;
> >>>>>>      smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_LARGE_DECREMENTER] = 
> >>>>>> SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> >>>>>> +    smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE] = SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We're now well past 4.0, and in fact we're about to go into soft
> >>>>> freeze for 4.1, so we're going to miss that too.  So 4.1 and earlier
> >>>>> will need to retain the old default.
> >>>>
> >>>> ok.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>>  DEFINE_SPAPR_MACHINE(3_1, "3.1", false);
> >>>>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> >>>>>> index a015a80..e010cb2 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> >>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@
> >>>>>>  #include "hw/ppc/fdt.h"
> >>>>>>  #include "target/ppc/mmu-hash64.h"
> >>>>>>  #include "target/ppc/mmu-book3s-v3.h"
> >>>>>> +#include "migration/blocker.h"
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>>  static void rtas_display_character(PowerPCCPU *cpu, SpaprMachineState 
> >>>>>> *spapr,
> >>>>>>                                     uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
> >>>>>> @@ -352,6 +353,60 @@ static void rtas_get_power_level(PowerPCCPU *cpu, 
> >>>>>> SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> >>>>>>      rtas_st(rets, 1, 100);
> >>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>> +static void rtas_ibm_nmi_register(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
> >>>>>> +                                  SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> >>>>>> +                                  uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
> >>>>>> +                                  target_ulong args,
> >>>>>> +                                  uint32_t nret, target_ulong rets)
> >>>>>> +{
> >>>>>> +    int ret;
> >>>>>> +    hwaddr rtas_addr = spapr_get_rtas_addr();
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +    if (!rtas_addr) {
> >>>>>> +        rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_NOT_SUPPORTED);
> >>>>>> +        return;
> >>>>>> +    }
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +    if (spapr_get_cap(spapr, SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE) == SPAPR_CAP_OFF) {
> >>>>>> +        rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_NOT_SUPPORTED);
> >>>>>> +        return;
> >>>>>> +    }
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +    ret = kvmppc_fwnmi_enable(cpu);
> >>>>>> +    if (ret == 1) {
> >>>>>> +        rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_NOT_SUPPORTED);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't understand this case separate from the others.  We've already
> >>>>> set the cap, so fwnmi support should be checked and available.
> >>>>
> >>>> But we have not enabled fwnmi in KVM. kvmppc_fwnmi_enable() returns 1 if
> >>>> cap_ppc_fwnmi is not available in KVM.
> >>>
> >>> But you've checked for the presence of the extension, yes?  So a
> >>> failure to enable the cap would be unexpected.  In which case how does
> >>> this case differ from.. 
> >>
> >> No, this is the function where I check for the presence of the
> >> extension. In kvm_arch_init() we just set cap_ppc_fwnmi to 1 if KVM
> >> support is available, but don't take any action if unavailable.
> > 
> > Yeah, that's not ok.  You should be checking for the presence of the
> > extension in the .apply() function.  If you start up with the spapr
> > cap selected then failing at nmi-register time means something has
> > gone badly wrong.
> 
> So, I should check for two things in the .apply() function: first if
> cap_ppc_fwnmi is supported and second if cap_ppc_fwnmi is enabled in KVM.

Not exactly.  Checking that the extension is supported means you *can*
enable it in KVM, but you should not do so at .apply() time (or NMI
behaviour won't be correct until nmi-register is called IIUC).  It
does mean that when you do enable the cap, a "not supported" failure
means something is wrong with the kernel.

> In that case kvm_vcpu_enable_cap(cs, KVM_CAP_PPC_FWNMI, 0) should be
> called during spapr_machine_init().
> 
> So, we will fail to boot (when SPAPR_CAP_FWNMI_MCE=ON) if cap_ppc_fwnmi
> can't be enabled irrespective of whether a guest issues nmi,register or not.
> 
> > 
> > This is necessary for migration: if you start on a system with nmi
> > support and the guest registers for it, you can't then migrate safely
> > to a system that doesn't have nmi support.  The way to handle that
> > case is to have qemu fail to even start up on a destination without
> > the support.
> > 
> >> So this case is when we are running an old version of KVM with no
> >> cap_ppc_fwnmi support.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +        return;
> >>>>>> +    } else if (ret < 0) {
> >>>>>> +        error_report("Couldn't enable KVM FWNMI capability");
> >>>>>> +        rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_HW_ERROR);
> >>>>>> +        return;
> >>>
> >>> ..this case.
> >>
> >> And this is when we have the KVM support but due to some problem with
> >> either KVM or QEMU we are unable to enable cap_ppc_fwnmi.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>>> +    }
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +    spapr->guest_machine_check_addr = rtas_ld(args, 1);
> >>>>>> +    rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_SUCCESS);
> >>>>>> +}
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +static void rtas_ibm_nmi_interlock(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
> >>>>>> +                                   SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> >>>>>> +                                   uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
> >>>>>> +                                   target_ulong args,
> >>>>>> +                                   uint32_t nret, target_ulong rets)
> >>>>>> +{
> >>>>>> +    if (spapr->guest_machine_check_addr == -1) {
> >>>>>> +        /* NMI register not called */
> >>>>>> +        rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_PARAM_ERROR);
> >>>>>> +    } else {
> >>>>>> +        /*
> >>>>>> +         * vCPU issuing "ibm,nmi-interlock" is done with NMI handling,
> >>>>>> +         * hence unset mc_status.
> >>>>>> +         */
> >>>>>> +        spapr->mc_status = -1;
> >>>>>> +        qemu_cond_signal(&spapr->mc_delivery_cond);
> >>>>>> +        migrate_del_blocker(spapr->fwnmi_migration_blocker);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hrm.  We add the blocker at the mce request point.  First, that's in
> >>>>> another patch, which isn't great.  Second, does that mean we could add
> >>>>> multiple times if we get an MCE on multiple CPUs?  Will that work and
> >>>>> correctly match adds and removes properly?
> >>>>
> >>>> If it is fine to move the migration patch as the last patch in the
> >>>> sequence, then we will have add and del blocker in the same patch.
> >>>>
> >>>> And yes we could add multiple times if we get MCE on multiple CPUs and
> >>>> as all those cpus call interlock there should be matching number of
> >>>> delete blockers.
> >>>
> >>> Ok, and I think adding the same pointer to the list multiple times
> >>> will work ok.
> >>
> >> I think so
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Btw, add_blocker() can fail - have you handled failure conditions?
> >>
> >> yes, I am handling it.
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> > 
> 

-- 
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                                | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature