Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <217248af-e980-9cb0-ff0d-9773413b9d38@thomaslambertz.de>
 <CANRm+CxWbkr0=DB7DBdaQOsTTt0XS5vSk_BRL2iFeAAm81H8Bg@mail.gmail.com> <3ae96202-a121-70a9-fe00-4b5bb4970242@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <3ae96202-a121-70a9-fe00-4b5bb4970242@redhat.com>
From:   Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jul 2019 12:28:42 +0800
Message-ID: <CANRm+CwiLn-FUM89t-rg-9za-e28KX9XQo5zVs3_XAq+Ya_0vA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [5.2 regression] x86/fpu changes cause crashes in KVM guest
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     Thomas Lambertz <mail@thomaslambertz.de>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Marc Orr <marcorr@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 19:09, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/07/19 10:59, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/14/891, "The scheduler will save the
> > guest fpu context when a vCPU thread is preempted, and restore it when
> > it is scheduled back in." But I can't find any scheduler codes do
> > this.
>
> That's because applying commit 240c35a37 was completely wrong.  The idea
> before commit 240c35a37 was that you have the following FPU states:
>
>                userspace (QEMU)             guest
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                processor                    vcpu->arch.guest_fpu
> >>> KVM_RUN: kvm_load_guest_fpu
>                vcpu->arch.user_fpu          processor
> >>> preempt out
>                vcpu->arch.user_fpu          current->thread.fpu
> >>> preempt in
>                vcpu->arch.user_fpu          processor
> >>> back to userspace
> >>> kvm_put_guest_fpu
>                processor                    vcpu->arch.guest_fpu
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> After removing user_fpu, QEMU's FPU state is destroyed when KVM_RUN is
> preempted.  So that's already messed up (I'll send a revert), and given
> the diagram above your patch makes total sense.
>
> With the new lazy model we want to hook into kvm_vcpu_arch_load and get
> the state back to the processor from current->thread.fpu, and indeed
> switch_fpu_return is essentially copy_kernel_to_fpregs(&current->thread.
> fpu->state).
>
> However I would keep the fpregs_assert_state_consistent in
> kvm_arch_vcpu_load, and also
> WARN_ON_ONCE(test_thread_flag(TIF_NEED_FPU_LOAD)) in vcpu_enter_guest.

Looks good to me, just send out two patches rebase on the revert.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li