From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>,
Marcelo Tossati <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] [PATCH] kvm: Fix tprot locking
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 14:02:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EC8EC70.4020008@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111117121552.798a359b@de.ibm.com>
On 11/17/2011 01:15 PM, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:27:41 +0200
> Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 11/17/2011 12:00 PM, Carsten Otte wrote:
> > > From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> > >
> > > There is a potential host deadlock in the tprot intercept handling.
> > > We must not hold the mmap semaphore while resolving the guest
> > > address. If userspace is remapping, then the memory detection in
> > > the guest is broken anyway so we can safely separate the
> > > address translation from walking the vmas.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff -urpN linux-2.6/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c linux-2.6-patched/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> > > --- linux-2.6/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c 2011-10-24 09:10:05.000000000 +0200
> > > +++ linux-2.6-patched/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c 2011-11-17 10:03:53.000000000 +0100
> > > @@ -336,6 +336,7 @@ static int handle_tprot(struct kvm_vcpu
> > > u64 address1 = disp1 + base1 ? vcpu->arch.guest_gprs[base1] : 0;
> > > u64 address2 = disp2 + base2 ? vcpu->arch.guest_gprs[base2] : 0;
> > > struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > > + unsigned long user_address;
> > >
> > > vcpu->stat.instruction_tprot++;
> > >
> > > @@ -349,9 +350,14 @@ static int handle_tprot(struct kvm_vcpu
> > > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > >
> > >
> > > + /* we must resolve the address without holding the mmap semaphore.
> > > + * This is ok since the userspace hypervisor is not supposed to change
> > > + * the mapping while the guest queries the memory. Otherwise the guest
> > > + * might crash or get wrong info anyway. */
> > > + user_address = (unsigned long) __guestaddr_to_user(vcpu, address1);
> > > +
> > > down_read(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
> > > - vma = find_vma(current->mm,
> > > - (unsigned long) __guestaddr_to_user(vcpu, address1));
> > > + vma = find_vma(current->mm, user_address);
> > > if (!vma) {
> > > up_read(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
> > > return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_ADDRESSING);
> > >
> >
> > Unrelated to the patch, but I'm curious: it looks like __gmap_fault()
> > dereferences the guest page table? How can it assume that it is mapped?
>
> The gmap code does not assume that the code is mapped. If the individual
> MB has not been mapped in the guest address space or the target memory
> is not mapped in the process address space __gmap_fault() returns -EFAULT.
>
> > I'm probably misreading the code.
I did misread it - I assumed it was guest page table, whereas those are
host page tables mapping guest memory (here, "guest page table" mean
guest-managed virt to phys translation).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-20 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-17 10:00 [patch 0/4] kvm-s390 patches Carsten Otte
2011-11-17 10:00 ` [patch 1/4] [PATCH] kvm-s390: Fix RUNNING flag misinterpretation Carsten Otte
2011-11-17 10:00 ` [patch 2/4] [PATCH] kvm-s390: handle SIGP sense running intercepts Carsten Otte
2011-11-17 10:15 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-17 10:19 ` Christian Borntraeger
2011-11-17 10:00 ` [patch 3/4] [PATCH] kvm: Fix tprot locking Carsten Otte
2011-11-17 10:27 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-17 11:15 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-11-17 11:32 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-11-20 12:05 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-20 12:02 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2011-11-17 10:00 ` [patch 4/4] [PATCH] kvm: announce SYNC_MMU Carsten Otte
2011-11-17 10:35 ` [patch 0/4] kvm-s390 patches Avi Kivity
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=4EC8EC70.4020008@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cotte@de.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.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.