Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1329389

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do

Show all headers | View raw

>>> On 2/8/2016 at 09:40 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: 

> 
> On 08/02/2016 17:33, Bruce Rogers wrote:
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> KVM_MP_STATE_INIT_RECEIVED is what Intel calls the "wait for SIPI"
>>>> >> state.  The BSP never gets a SIPI, it goes straight to 0xFFFFFFF0
>>>> >> instead.  Can you explain the problem more in detail?
>>> > 
>>> > I suspect this is about sending INIT-SIPI from another CPU, directed to
>>> > the BSP, isn't it? We may have to differentiate between CPU (including
>>> > system) reset and that IPI case.
>> That is correct. In looking over the KVM code which deals with BSP, this was
>> the only place which seemed wrong to me wrt special casing for BSP outside 
> the
>> context of initial system initialization / reset. As far as I understand the
>> BSP shouldn't be treated differently in this case.
> 
> See 8.4.2 of the SDM:
> 
> If the MP protocol has completed and a BSP is chosen, subsequent INITs
> (either to a specific processor or system wide) do not cause the MP
> protocol to be repeated. Instead, each logical processor examines its
> BSP flag (in the IA32_APIC_BASE MSR) to determine whether it should
> execute the BIOS boot-strap code (if it is the BSP) or enter a
> wait-for-SIPI state (if it is an AP).
> 
> So it is correct to treat the BSP differently here, I think.

I had read that, but I though this was speaking from the perspective of the
SMP aware BIOS code only. In other words, the BIOS would sidetrack AP's
(based on BSP flag not being present), while BSP would be allowed to go through
the regular BIOS code, checking for reset case, etc. An OS on the other hand
would be free to treat all x86 processors equally, once it has booted into
fully symmetrical mode.
I certainly could be wrong about my above interpretation, but with these
changes I'm proposing, things work well for the test case of manually onlining
the BSP after the crash kernel has been started (via kexec -e on a AP processor
with maxcpus=1 on the crash kernel command line). From looking through the
kernel git history it appears this sequence of events was explicitly supported
quite a while ago, and we've got a customer who uses this for fast recovery from
a guest kernel crash.

Bruce

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization code in vmx_cpu_reset Bruce Rogers <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-04 00:20 +0100
  [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Bruce Rogers <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-04 00:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-02-08 16:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> - 2016-02-08 16:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like  APs do "Bruce Rogers" <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-08 17:40 +0100
          Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-02-08 17:50 +0100
            Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like  APs do "Bruce Rogers" <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-08 18:30 +0100
              Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-02-08 18:50 +0100
            Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like  APs do "Bruce Rogers" <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-08 18:40 +0100
              Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: allow BSP to handle INIT IPIs like APs do Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> - 2016-02-08 19:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization code in vmx_cpu_reset Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com> - 2016-02-04 00:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization  code in vmx_cpu_reset "Bruce Rogers" <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-04 00:40 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization code in  vmx_cpu_reset Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-02-08 16:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization  code in vmx_cpu_reset "Bruce Rogers" <brogers@suse.com> - 2016-02-08 17:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization code in  vmx_cpu_reset Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-02-08 17:50 +0100

csiph-web