From: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
To: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com,
jasowang@redhat.com, shan.gavin@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH v3] vhost: Improve vhost_get_avail_idx() with smp_rmb()
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:27:48 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240429232748.642356-1-gshan@redhat.com> (raw)
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
All the callers of vhost_get_avail_idx() are concerned with the
memory barrier, imposed by smp_rmb() to ensure the order of the
available ring entry read and avail_idx read.
Improve vhost_get_avail_idx() so that smp_rmb() is executed when
the avail_idx is accessed. With it, the callers needn't to worry
about the memory barrier. As a side benefit, we also validate the
index on all paths now, which will hopefully help to catch future
errors earlier.
Note that current code is inconsistent in how the errors are handled.
They are treated as an empty ring in some places, but as non-empty
ring in other places. This patch doesn't attempt to change the existing
behaviour.
No functional change intended.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
v3: Improved commit log and comments as Michael suggested
---
drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 105 +++++++++++++++++-------------------------
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
index 8995730ce0bf..60d9592eff7b 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
@@ -1290,10 +1290,36 @@ static void vhost_dev_unlock_vqs(struct vhost_dev *d)
mutex_unlock(&d->vqs[i]->mutex);
}
-static inline int vhost_get_avail_idx(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
- __virtio16 *idx)
+static inline int vhost_get_avail_idx(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
{
- return vhost_get_avail(vq, *idx, &vq->avail->idx);
+ __virtio16 idx;
+ int r;
+
+ r = vhost_get_avail(vq, idx, &vq->avail->idx);
+ if (unlikely(r < 0)) {
+ vq_err(vq, "Failed to access available index at %p (%d)\n",
+ &vq->avail->idx, r);
+ return r;
+ }
+
+ /* Check it isn't doing very strange thing with available indexes */
+ vq->avail_idx = vhost16_to_cpu(vq, idx);
+ if (unlikely((u16)(vq->avail_idx - vq->last_avail_idx) > vq->num)) {
+ vq_err(vq, "Invalid available index change from %u to %u",
+ vq->last_avail_idx, vq->avail_idx);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ /* We're done if there is nothing new */
+ if (vq->avail_idx == vq->last_avail_idx)
+ return 0;
+
+ /*
+ * We updated vq->avail_idx so we need a memory barrier between
+ * the index read above and the caller reading avail ring entries.
+ */
+ smp_rmb();
+ return 1;
}
static inline int vhost_get_avail_head(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
@@ -2498,38 +2524,17 @@ int vhost_get_vq_desc(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
{
struct vring_desc desc;
unsigned int i, head, found = 0;
- u16 last_avail_idx;
- __virtio16 avail_idx;
+ u16 last_avail_idx = vq->last_avail_idx;
__virtio16 ring_head;
int ret, access;
- /* Check it isn't doing very strange things with descriptor numbers. */
- last_avail_idx = vq->last_avail_idx;
-
if (vq->avail_idx == vq->last_avail_idx) {
- if (unlikely(vhost_get_avail_idx(vq, &avail_idx))) {
- vq_err(vq, "Failed to access avail idx at %p\n",
- &vq->avail->idx);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
- vq->avail_idx = vhost16_to_cpu(vq, avail_idx);
-
- if (unlikely((u16)(vq->avail_idx - last_avail_idx) > vq->num)) {
- vq_err(vq, "Guest moved avail index from %u to %u",
- last_avail_idx, vq->avail_idx);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
+ ret = vhost_get_avail_idx(vq);
+ if (unlikely(ret < 0))
+ return ret;
- /* If there's nothing new since last we looked, return
- * invalid.
- */
- if (vq->avail_idx == last_avail_idx)
+ if (!ret)
return vq->num;
-
- /* Only get avail ring entries after they have been
- * exposed by guest.
- */
- smp_rmb();
}
/* Grab the next descriptor number they're advertising, and increment
@@ -2790,35 +2795,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_add_used_and_signal_n);
/* return true if we're sure that avaiable ring is empty */
bool vhost_vq_avail_empty(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
{
- __virtio16 avail_idx;
int r;
if (vq->avail_idx != vq->last_avail_idx)
return false;
- r = vhost_get_avail_idx(vq, &avail_idx);
- if (unlikely(r))
- return false;
-
- vq->avail_idx = vhost16_to_cpu(vq, avail_idx);
- if (vq->avail_idx != vq->last_avail_idx) {
- /* Since we have updated avail_idx, the following
- * call to vhost_get_vq_desc() will read available
- * ring entries. Make sure that read happens after
- * the avail_idx read.
- */
- smp_rmb();
- return false;
- }
+ r = vhost_get_avail_idx(vq);
- return true;
+ /* Note: we treat error as non-empty here */
+ return r == 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_vq_avail_empty);
/* OK, now we need to know about added descriptors. */
bool vhost_enable_notify(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
{
- __virtio16 avail_idx;
int r;
if (!(vq->used_flags & VRING_USED_F_NO_NOTIFY))
@@ -2842,25 +2833,13 @@ bool vhost_enable_notify(struct vhost_dev *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
/* They could have slipped one in as we were doing that: make
* sure it's written, then check again. */
smp_mb();
- r = vhost_get_avail_idx(vq, &avail_idx);
- if (r) {
- vq_err(vq, "Failed to check avail idx at %p: %d\n",
- &vq->avail->idx, r);
- return false;
- }
- vq->avail_idx = vhost16_to_cpu(vq, avail_idx);
- if (vq->avail_idx != vq->last_avail_idx) {
- /* Since we have updated avail_idx, the following
- * call to vhost_get_vq_desc() will read available
- * ring entries. Make sure that read happens after
- * the avail_idx read.
- */
- smp_rmb();
- return true;
- }
+ r = vhost_get_avail_idx(vq);
+ /* Note: we treat error as empty here */
+ if (unlikely(r < 0))
+ return false;
- return false;
+ return r;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_enable_notify);
--
2.44.0
reply other threads:[~2024-04-29 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240429232748.642356-1-gshan@redhat.com \
--to=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=shan.gavin@gmail.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).