summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/arch
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJosh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>2019-01-30 16:13:58 +0300
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>2019-02-12 21:46:13 +0300
commit5e1f1c1f5d00ffba3600ba1ffb3a1fc7dae0a375 (patch)
treea17aaeb05f3e6cf5cb4089efc36cd5f8cc89fd6b /arch
parent1c965b1b5ecc2c9e1d59b2514cedb6f7483a0241 (diff)
downloadlinux-5e1f1c1f5d00ffba3600ba1ffb3a1fc7dae0a375.tar.xz
cpu/hotplug: Fix "SMT disabled by BIOS" detection for KVM
commit b284909abad48b07d3071a9fc9b5692b3e64914b upstream. With the following commit: 73d5e2b47264 ("cpu/hotplug: detect SMT disabled by BIOS") ... the hotplug code attempted to detect when SMT was disabled by BIOS, in which case it reported SMT as permanently disabled. However, that code broke a virt hotplug scenario, where the guest is booted with only primary CPU threads, and a sibling is brought online later. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be a way to reliably distinguish between the HW "SMT disabled by BIOS" case and the virt "sibling not yet brought online" case. So the above-mentioned commit was a bit misguided, as it permanently disabled SMT for both cases, preventing future virt sibling hotplugs. Going back and reviewing the original problems which were attempted to be solved by that commit, when SMT was disabled in BIOS: 1) /sys/devices/system/cpu/smt/control showed "on" instead of "notsupported"; and 2) vmx_vm_init() was incorrectly showing the L1TF_MSG_SMT warning. I'd propose that we instead consider #1 above to not actually be a problem. Because, at least in the virt case, it's possible that SMT wasn't disabled by BIOS and a sibling thread could be brought online later. So it makes sense to just always default the smt control to "on" to allow for that possibility (assuming cpuid indicates that the CPU supports SMT). The real problem is #2, which has a simple fix: change vmx_vm_init() to query the actual current SMT state -- i.e., whether any siblings are currently online -- instead of looking at the SMT "control" sysfs value. So fix it by: a) reverting the original "fix" and its followup fix: 73d5e2b47264 ("cpu/hotplug: detect SMT disabled by BIOS") bc2d8d262cba ("cpu/hotplug: Fix SMT supported evaluation") and b) changing vmx_vm_init() to query the actual current SMT state -- instead of the sysfs control value -- to determine whether the L1TF warning is needed. This also requires the 'sched_smt_present' variable to exported, instead of 'cpu_smt_control'. Fixes: 73d5e2b47264 ("cpu/hotplug: detect SMT disabled by BIOS") Reported-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Joe Mario <jmario@redhat.com> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/e3a85d585da28cc333ecbc1e78ee9216e6da9396.1548794349.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch')
-rw-r--r--arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c2
-rw-r--r--arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c3
2 files changed, 3 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
index 004e60470a77..ec7aedba3d74 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ void __init check_bugs(void)
* identify_boot_cpu() initialized SMT support information, let the
* core code know.
*/
- cpu_smt_check_topology_early();
+ cpu_smt_check_topology();
if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) {
pr_info("CPU: ");
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
index 66feeae4c206..1f5de4314291 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <linux/highmem.h>
#include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/sched/smt.h>
#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
#include <linux/trace_events.h>
@@ -10120,7 +10121,7 @@ static int vmx_vm_init(struct kvm *kvm)
* Warn upon starting the first VM in a potentially
* insecure environment.
*/
- if (cpu_smt_control == CPU_SMT_ENABLED)
+ if (sched_smt_active())
pr_warn_once(L1TF_MSG_SMT);
if (l1tf_vmx_mitigation == VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_NEVER)
pr_warn_once(L1TF_MSG_L1D);