qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Qemu-devel] Re: tcg/{ppc, s390, sparc}: branch target and code retransl


From: Alexander Graf
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: tcg/{ppc, s390, sparc}: branch target and code retranslation
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:29:28 +0100

On 10.01.2011, at 15:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 03:20:40PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> 
>> On 10.01.2011, at 15:15, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 03:07:52PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 10.01.2011, at 15:00, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 01:13:25PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 06.01.2011, at 23:12, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have just sent a tcg/arm patch concerning code retranslation. You
>>>>>>> might want to look at the description (copied below), as from a first
>>>>>>> glance ppc, s390 and sparc TCG targets might be affected. If you see
>>>>>>> guest kernel panics, some segmentation fault of qemu or in the guest,
>>>>>>> strange behaviors, that happen randomly and that looks difficult to
>>>>>>> debug it might be the issue.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Aurelien
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> | QEMU uses code retranslation to restore the CPU state when an 
>>>>>>> exception
>>>>>>> | happens. For it to work the retranslation must not modify the 
>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>> | code. This is what is currently implemented in ARM TCG.
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>> | However on CPU that don't have icache/dcache/memory synchronised like
>>>>>>> | ARM, this requirement is stronger and code retranslation must not 
>>>>>>> modify
>>>>>>> | the generated code "atomically", as the cache line might be flushed
>>>>>>> | at any moment (interrupt, exception, task switching), even if not
>>>>>>> | triggered by QEMU. The probability for this to happen is very low, and
>>>>>>> | depends on cache size and associativiy, machine load, interrupts, so 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> | symptoms are might happen randomly.
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>> | This requirement is currently not followed in tcg/arm, for the
>>>>>>> | load/store code, which basically has the following structure:
>>>>>>> |   1) tlb access code is written
>>>>>>> |   2) conditional fast path code is written
>>>>>>> |   3) branch is written with a temporary target
>>>>>>> |   4) slow path code is written
>>>>>>> |   5) branch target is updated
>>>>>>> | The cache lines corresponding to the retranslated code is not flushed
>>>>>>> | after code retranslation as the generated code is supposed to be the
>>>>>>> | same. However if the cache line corresponding to the branch 
>>>>>>> instruction
>>>>>>> | is flushed between step 3 and 5, and is not flushed again before the
>>>>>>> | code is executed again, the branch target is wrong. In the guest, the
>>>>>>> | symptoms are MMU page fault at a random addresses, which leads to
>>>>>>> | kernel page fault or segmentation faults.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see the problem. If you have separate icache from dcache, the 
>>>>>> code in question doesn't get executed during the rewrite, so all should 
>>>>>> be fine. If you have both combined, the data write should automatically 
>>>>>> modify the cache line, so all is great too.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As far as I understand, this is what happens to the branch target
>>>>> instruction, or at least one possibility:
>>>>> 
>>>>> operation                                 | icache | dcache | mem/L2 |
>>>>> ------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
>>>>> tlb access code is written                | absent | absent |   ok   |
>>>>> conditional fast path code is written     | absent | absent |   ok   |
>>>>> branch is written with a temporary target | absent | wrong  |   ok   |
>>>>> cache line is flushed to memory           | absent | absent |  wrong |
>>>>> slow path code is written                 | absent | absent |  wrong |
>>>>> branch target is updated                  | absent |   ok   |  wrong |
>>>>> TB is re-executed                         | wrong  |   ok   |  wrong |
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that the issue is real, the patch really fixes the issue on ARM and
>>>>> MIPS. It's not impossible that I don't fully understand it given I can't
>>>>> analyse the cache values at a given time. However, when QEMU crashes 
>>>>> because of that, we have seen that the executed code doesn't match what
>>>>> GDB says, and changing the temporary branch value also changes the way 
>>>>> QEMU or the guest crash.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The problem doesn't happens very often though (for sure less than 1 
>>>>> every few millions). The other way to fix it is to issue a cache flush
>>>>> after a code retranslation, however, it is something very costly on some
>>>>> architectures.
>>>> 
>>>> I'd guess it only happens when code is overwritten. Only then icache can 
>>>> still be stale in that code region. Can't we just invalidate the icache on 
>>>> every tb flush? That should also fix the issue I'd guess.
>>> 
>>> That's a solution that works (tested). However making sure that the
>>> retranslation doesn't change the code looks better.
>> 
>> Yeah, I agree. Temporary retranslation really shouldn't modify existing 
>> code. We really do need an icache flush on tb flushes still though as that's 
>> a separate issue? Or are these already in?
>> 
> 
> We already have an icache flush after the first translation. We don't
> have any when the TB is flushed, but I don't think it is something
> necessary. The new TB that will replace it will issue an icache flush
> after it has been translated.

We don't need the flush after the translation if we just flush the whole block 
on invalidate. That should be a speedup, no? Flushing the full thing once is 
probably faster than lots of small flushes on every TB write.

Also, if there's a flush after the translation, I'm even more puzzled how the 
race you describe above can occur.


Alex




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]