lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation
On 10/10/2009 02:24 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 10/07/09 03:25, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> def try_pvclock_vtime():
>> tsc, p0 = rdtscp()
>> v0 = pvclock[p0].version
>> tsc, p = rdtscp()
>> t = pvclock_time(pvclock[p], tsc)
>> if p != p0 or pvclock[p].version != v0:
>> raise Exception("Processor or timebased change under our feet")
>> return t
>>
> This doesn't quite work.
>
> If we end up migrating some time after the first rdtscp, then the
> accesses to pvclock[] will be cross-cpu. Since we don't made any strong
> SMP memory ordering guarantees on updating the structure, the snapshot
> isn't guaranteed to be consistent even if we re-check the version at the
> end.
>

We only hit this if we have a double migration, otherwise we see p != p0.

Most likely all existing implementations do have a write barrier on the
guest entry path, so if we add a read barrier between the two compares,
that ensures we're reading from the same cpu again.

> So to use rdtscp we need to either redefine the update of
> pvclock_vcpu_time_info to be SMP-safe, or keep the additional migration
> check.
>

I think we can update the ABI after verifying all implementations do
have a write barrier.

--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-10 20:19    [W:0.137 / U:23.996 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site