From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Vincent Donnefort" <vdonnefort@google.com>
Cc: "Oliver Upton" <oupton@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, "Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/20] KVM: arm64: Prefault host stage-2 entries on block split
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 10:31:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260803103111.9B6D01F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260803100904.3563942-2-vdonnefort@google.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] Missing page table reference count increments for prefaulted PTEs leads to a Use-After-Free of the page table and hypervisor panics.
- [Critical] Early return on invalid PTEs silently drops pKVM page ownership metadata, reverting guest memory to host ownership.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 01/20] KVM: arm64: Prefault host stage-2 entries on block split ---
commit ddbd017ec6a553952eac0f275c98da410f8a6cdb
Author: Keir Fraser <keirf@google.com>
KVM: arm64: Prefault host stage-2 entries on block split
For the host stage-2 that is idmap, we can avoid lazy-mapping on block
splitting by propagate existing valid mappings to neighbouring entries
of the new table.
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> index b74dd5ce1efd3..34f78a58cded0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> @@ -1030,10 +1030,39 @@ static int stage2_map_walk_table_pre(const struct kvm_pgtable_visit_ctx *ctx,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void stage2_map_prefault_idmap(const struct kvm_pgtable_visit_ctx *ctx, kvm_pte_t *ptep)
> +{
> + kvm_pte_t block_pte = ctx->old;
> + u64 pa;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!kvm_pte_valid(block_pte))
> + return;
[Severity: Critical]
Does this early return risk dropping pKVM page ownership metadata?
In pKVM, host stage-2 page tables encode page ownership and sharing metadata
using invalid but "counted" PTEs. If a block mapping containing such metadata
needs to be split, returning early here skips populating the child table for
these PTEs. The child table entries would remain zero-filled, which in pKVM
denotes unannotated host-owned memory, potentially allowing the host to
re-acquire guest memory.
> +
> + pa = ALIGN_DOWN(ctx->addr, kvm_granule_size(ctx->level));
> + for (i = 0; i < PTRS_PER_PTE; ++i, ++ptep, pa += kvm_granule_size(ctx->level + 1)) {
> + kvm_pte_t pte = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(pa, block_pte, ctx->level + 1);
> +
> + /*
> + * Skip ptes in the range being modified by the caller if we're
> + * installing last level entries. Otherwise, we need to
> + * temporarily put in a valid mapping to make sure the
> + * prefaulting logic is triggered on the next
> + * stage2_map_walk_leaf(). This adds an unnecessary TLBI as
> + * we'll presumably re-break the freshly installed block, but
> + * that should happen very infrequently.
> + */
> + if ((ctx->level < (KVM_PGTABLE_LAST_LEVEL - 1)) ||
> + (pa < ctx->addr) || (pa >= ctx->end))
> + *ptep = pte;
[Severity: Critical]
Could this lead to a premature freeing of the child page table?
When pre-populating the new child table with valid (and therefore "counted")
PTEs, the refcount of the newly allocated child page table is not incremented
via ctx->mm_ops->get_page(ptep).
Since the refcount remains at 1 regardless of the number of valid PTEs
written here, any subsequent unmap or break of one of these PTEs will drop
the refcount to 0. This could cause the EL2 buddy allocator to free the page
table while it is still linked and in use by the hardware MMU.
> + }
> +}
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260803100904.3563942-1-vdonnefort@google.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-03 10:08 [PATCH 00/20] Huge mapping support for protected VMs Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 01/20] KVM: arm64: Prefault host stage-2 entries on block split Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:31 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 02/20] KVM: arm64: Propagate host stage-2 annotated " Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 03/20] KVM: arm64: Allow block-level stage-2 annotation Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:40 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 04/20] KVM: arm64: Use block-level annotations when setting up the host stage-2 Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 05/20] KVM: arm64: Make pKVM ownership selftest an HVC Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 06/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to __pkvm_host_share/unshare_hyp() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 07/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to __pkvm_host_donate_guest() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 08/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to __pkvm_host_reclaim_page_guest() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:28 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 09/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to __pkvm_guest_share_host() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 10/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to __pkvm_guest_unshare_host() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 11/20] KVM: arm64: Add a range to pKVM ownership selftest Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 12/20] KVM: arm64: Handle huge mappings in __pkvm_host_force_reclaim_page_guest() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 13/20] KVM: arm64: Handle huge mappings in __pkvm_vcpu_in_poison_fault() Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 14/20] KVM: arm64: pkvm: Warn on guest stage-2 block collapse Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:08 ` [PATCH 15/20] KVM: arm64: Add pkvm_hyp_req infrastructure Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:46 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:09 ` [PATCH 16/20] KVM: arm64: Add __pkvm_host_split_guest HVC Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:54 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:09 ` [PATCH 17/20] KVM: arm64: Extend pKVM page ownership selftests to cover guest block split Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 11:01 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:09 ` [PATCH 18/20] KVM: arm64: Add PKVM_HYP_REQ_SPLIT Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 10:54 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:09 ` [PATCH 19/20] KVM: arm64: Raise PKVM_HYP_REQ_SPLIT on guest to host sharing Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 11:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 10:09 ` [PATCH 20/20] KVM: arm64: Stage-2 huge mappings for protected VMs Vincent Donnefort
2026-08-03 11:04 ` sashiko-bot
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=20260803103111.9B6D01F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vdonnefort@google.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.