WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] Need help in debugging partially blocked hypervisor

To: Dietmar Hahn <dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Need help in debugging partially blocked hypervisor
From: "Shan, Haitao" <haitao.shan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:49:23 +0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 01:51:02 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200911021011.25669.dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200910301320.40125.dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C7109568.18E0D%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <481ad8630911011712p38b028a9r8078199b176326f3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200911021011.25669.dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcpbnHgjWgd1YCYfSoqN81y/6XZyngAAejzQ
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Need help in debugging partially blocked hypervisor
Very detailed explanation indeed. What you described is the same as I saw 
months ago.
But unluckily, I do not know the root cause yet. It seems to me that unmasking 
of PMI in local APIC will immediately generate a new NMI in the system if one 
of the enabled counter is zero at that time. 
That is why I was asking you whether you could try to set that counter to some 
value other than zero (for example, 0x1) before unmasking(in your case, it is 
Fixed Counter 1 0x30a) PMI in vpmu_do_interrupt and see whether it helped.

When I met this problem, I remember that I tried two approaches:
1> Setting the counter to non-zero before unmasking PMI in vpmu_do_interrupt;
2> Remove unmasking PMI from vpmu_do_interrupt and unmask *physical PMI* when 
guest vcpu unmasks virtual PMI.
I remember that approach 2 can fix this issue. But I do not remember the result 
of approach 1, since I met this about one year ago.
It is my understanding that approach 2 is quite same as approach 1, since 
normally guest will set the counter to some negative value (for example, 
-100000) before unmasking virtual PMI.
However, approach 2 looks cleaner and more reasonable.

Can you have a try and let me know the result? If both can not work, there 
might be some problems that I have not met before.

BTW: Sorry, I did not see your patch to enable NHM vpmu before. So, there is no 
need for me to work on that now. :)

Haitao


Dietmar Hahn wrote:
> Hi Haitao,
> 
>> Can I know how you enabled vPMU on Nehalem? This is not supported in
>> current Xen.
> 
> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2009-09/msg00829.html
> 
>> 
>> Concerning vpmu support, I totally agree that we can disable this
>> feature by default. If anyone really wants to use it, he can use boot
>> options to turn it on.
> 
> Yes, that's OK for me.
> 
>> I am preparing a patch for that. And I will
>> send a patch to enable NHM vpmu together.
>> 
>> For the problem that Dietmar met, I think I once met this before. Can
>> you add some code in vpmu_do_interrupt that sets the counter you are
>> using to a value other than zero? Please let me know if that can
>> help. 
> 
> I don't set the counter to zero. I use 0-val to set the counter.
> Actually I testet on Nehalem with
> - General Perf-counter #2 (0xc3) with CPU_CLK_UNHALTED and val=1100000
> - Fixed counter #1 (0x30a) and val=1100000
> The thing is that in normal case the overflows of both counters appear
> nearly at the same time.
> As described I added some extra tracer for xentrace in
> core2_vpmu_do_interrupt() so the code looks like:
> 
>     rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS, msr_content);     -> 1. Step
>       {
>               uint32_t HAHN_l, HAHN_h;
>               HAHN_l = (uint32_t) msr_content;
>               HAHN_h = (uint32_t) (msr_content >> 32);
>               HVMTRACE_3D(HAHN_TR2, v, 1, HAHN_h, HAHN_l);      -> 2. Step
>       }
>     if ( !msr_content )
>         return 0;
>     core2_vpmu_cxt->global_ovf_status |= msr_content;
>     msr_content = 0xC000000700000000 | ((1 << core2_get_pmc_count())
>     - 1); wrmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL, msr_content);   -> 3.
> Step 
> 
>     rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS, msr_content);     -> 4. Step
>       {
>         uint32_t HAHN_l, HAHN_h;
>         HAHN_l = (uint32_t) msr_content;
>         HAHN_h = (uint32_t) (msr_content >> 32);
>         HVMTRACE_3D(HAHN_TR2, v, 0xa, HAHN_h, HAHN_l);    -> 5. Step
> 
>         rdmsrl(0xc3, msr_content);                        -> 6. Step
>         General counter #2 HAHN_l = (uint32_t) msr_content;
>         HAHN_h = (uint32_t) (msr_content >> 32);
>         HVMTRACE_3D(HAHN_TR2, v, 0xc3, HAHN_h, HAHN_l);
>         rdmsrl(0x30a, msr_content);                       -> 7. Step
>         Fixed counter #1 HAHN_l = (uint32_t) msr_content;
>         HAHN_h = (uint32_t) (msr_content >> 32);
>         HVMTRACE_3D(HAHN_TR2, v, 0x30a, HAHN_h, HAHN_l);
>       }
> 
> With these tracers I got the following output:
> 
> Last good NMI:
> Both counter cause the NMI. Resetting works OK.
> The counter itself were running further.
> 2. Step: par1 = 0x01,  high = 0x0002, low =  0x0004 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 5. Step: par1 = 0x0a,  high = 0x0000, low =  0x0000 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 6. Step: par1 = 0xc3,  high = 0x0000, low =  0x03c4 ]  rdmsrl(0xc3) 
> -> #2 general counter 
> 7. Step: par1 = 0x30a, high = 0x0000, low =  0x02da ]  rdmsrl(0x30a)
> -> #1 fixed counter 
> 
> NMI from where things goes wrong:
> Both counter cause the NMI. Resetting works NOT correct, only for the
> general counter!
> The general counter (caused the NMI) seems to be stopped!
> 2. Step: par1 = 0x01,  high = 0x0002, low =  0x0004 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 5. Step: par1 = 0x0a,  high = 0x0002, low =  0x0000 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 6. Step: par1 = 0xc3,  high = 0x0000, low =  0x00ec ]  rdmsrl(0xc3) 
> -> #2 general counter 
> 7. Step: par1 = 0x30a, high = 0x0000, low =  0x0000 ]  rdmsrl(0x30a)
> -> #1 fixed counter 
> 
> Wrong NMI:
> Only the fixed counter causes the NMI (which was not resetted during
> NMI handling above!) Both counter seems to be stopped!
> 2. Step: par1 = 0x01,  high = 0x0002, low =  0x0000 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 5. Step: par1 = 0x0a,  high = 0x0002, low =  0x0000 ] 
> rdmsrl(MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS) 
> 6. Step: par1 = 0xc3,  high = 0x0000, low =  0x00ec ]  rdmsrl(0xc3) 
> -> #2 general counter 
> 7. Step: par1 = 0x30a, high = 0x0000, low =  0x0000 ]  rdmsrl(0x30a)
> -> #1 fixed counter 
> 
> And this state remains forever!
> I hope my explanations are understandable ;-)
> 
> Until now I can see this behavior only on a Nehalem processor.
> 
> Thanks.
> Dietmar
> 
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> Shan Haitao
>> 
>> 2009/10/30 Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> On 30/10/2009 12:20, "Dietmar Hahn" <dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> I searched the intel processor spec but couldn't find any help.
>>>> So my questions is, what is wrong here?
>>>> Can anybody with more knowledge point me in the right direction,
>>>> what can I still do to find the real cause of this?
>>> 
>>> You should probably Cc one of the Intel guys who implemented this
>>> stuff -- I've added Haitao Shan. 
>>> 
>>> Meanwhile I'd be interested to know whether things work okay for
>>> you, minus performance counters and the hypervisor hang, if you
>>> return immediately from vpmu_initialise(). Really at minimum we
>>> need such a fix, perhaps with a boot paremeter to re-enable the
>>> feature, for 3.4.2 release; allowing guests to hose the hypervisor
>>> like this is of course not on. 
>>> 
>>>  -- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel