All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Cc: Rick P Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	 "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "linux-coco@lists.linux.dev" <linux-coco@lists.linux.dev>,
	"kas@kernel.org" <kas@kernel.org>,
	 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "nik.borisov@suse.com" <nik.borisov@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] KVM: TDX: Enable Bus Lock VM exit
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:46:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <an84cenJjf7EqhVM@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <77567574-d26c-4d2c-b5ce-5da28a7178d6@intel.com>

On Fri, Aug 14, 2026, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On 8/13/2026 10:43 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2026, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> > > On 8/13/2026 6:58 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:

...

> > The more I look at this, the more I'm against shoving garbage into vt->exit_reasons.
> > With tdx_is_exit_reason_valid(), this is trivially easy to handle, *and* explicitly
> > captures the logic instead of subtly rerouting KVM away from meaningful handling.
> 
> tdx_is_exit_reason_valid() doesn't work unless we update the vp_enter_ret to
> one that isn't one of the status code with valid Exit Reason. See below.

Correct.

> About the idea, isn't the purpose of setting the Exit Reason to a synthesized
> one is to avoid the undefined Exit Reason causing false-positives when it
> happens to match one of the existing ones?

Yes.  The nuance is that I'm against clobbering the *full* exit reason.  I am
not against setting exit_reason.basic to something like EXIT_REASON_INVALID_STATE.

> If we are going to use tdx_is_exit_reason_valid(), does it mean we can drop
> the synthesized Exit Reason entirely and check tdx_is_exit_reason_valid()
> everywhere when KVM is going to consume Exit Reason?  e.g., for this initial
> bus_lock_detected bit handling here. we can avoid it by below. (Which makes
> it different for VMX, and somehow prevents consolidating the code between VMX
> and TDX around the exit handlers that we plan to do after series)

I'd rather not, as it would make checking for tdx_is_exit_reason_valid() much
more load bearing.  I.e. I want to minimize the number of flows that *need* to
check tdx_is_exit_reason_valid(), and an easy way to help on that front is to
ensure that exit_reason[31:16] is accurate with respect to what to the last
(attempted) entry to the guest.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c
> index b6c30c4c6b84..52360313dd82 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c
> @@ -2169,7 +2169,8 @@ int tdx_handle_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, fastpath_t
> fastpath)
>         int ret = __tdx_handle_exit(vcpu, fastpath);
> 
>         /* Exit to user space when bus lock was detected */
> -       if (vmx_get_exit_reason(vcpu).bus_lock_detected) {
> +       if (tdx_is_exit_reason_valid(vcpu) &&
> +           vmx_get_exit_reason(vcpu).bus_lock_detected) {
>                 if (ret > 0) {
>                         vcpu->run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_X86_BUS_LOCK;
>                         ret = 0;
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c
> > index 95d89d809c19..a1f5b5dc1fa3 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c
> > @@ -157,6 +157,14 @@ static fastpath_t vt_vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 run_flags)
> >          return vmx_vcpu_run(vcpu, run_flags);
> >   }
> > +static void vt_handle_exit_irqoff(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > +{
> > +       if (is_td_vcpu(vcpu) && !tdx_is_exit_reason_valid(vcpu))
> 
> No, this doesn't work.
> 
> The previous vp_enter_ret was TDX_SUCCESS with
> EXIT_REASON_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT. KVM handled it and is going to re-enter the
> TD. But wait_for_sept_zap is set by other vCPU thread, KVM decides to return
> directly but the vp_entere_ret isn't updated.

Oh, right, it really is the same situation as emulation_required, sort of.  The
key difference is that wait_for_sept_zap is per-VM, not per-VM, and so if it's
*cleared* between tdx_vcpu_run() and vt_handle_exit_irqoff(), then KVM would get
a false negative and again synthesize a duplicate IRQ.

Actually, can't we just do this?  Logically it's sound: if the exit was handled,
then there's nothing to be done.

diff --git arch/x86/kvm/x86.c arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 0626e835e9eb..6cace57e45fd 100644
--- arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -8374,7 +8374,8 @@ static int vcpu_enter_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
        if (vcpu->arch.xfd_no_write_intercept)
                fpu_sync_guest_vmexit_xfd_state();
 
-       kvm_x86_call(handle_exit_irqoff)(vcpu);
+       if (exit_fastpath != EXIT_FASTPATH_EXIT_HANDLED)
+               kvm_x86_call(handle_exit_irqoff)(vcpu);
 
        if (vcpu->arch.guest_fpu.xfd_err)
                wrmsrq(MSR_IA32_XFD_ERR, 0);

      reply	other threads:[~2026-08-14 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-12  8:02 [PATCH v3 0/4] KVM: TDX: Enable VM-DoS Prevention Features for TDX Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12  8:02 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] KVM: TDX: Enable Notify VM exit Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12  8:02 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: TDX: Set bits 31:16 to 0 for the synthesized Exit Reason Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12 21:58   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-08-12  8:02 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] KVM: TDX: Don't assume exit_reason[31:16] as all-0 in tdx_to_vmx_exit_reason() Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12  8:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12  9:07     ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12 22:55       ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-08-13 23:44         ` Sean Christopherson
2026-08-14  1:02           ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-14 15:12             ` Sean Christopherson
2026-08-13  0:14       ` Sean Christopherson
2026-08-13  8:42         ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12  8:02 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] KVM: TDX: Enable Bus Lock VM exit Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-12  8:20   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12  9:11     ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-13  0:06       ` Sean Christopherson
2026-08-12 22:58   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-08-13 11:17     ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-13 14:43       ` Sean Christopherson
2026-08-14  0:49         ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-08-14 15:46           ` Sean Christopherson [this message]

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=an84cenJjf7EqhVM@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.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.