kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: nVMX: Shadowing of CPU_BASED_VM_EXEC_CONTROL broken
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 07:34:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141008233447.GA17692@kernel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54355344.5050301@siemens.com>

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 05:07:48PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>On 2014-10-08 12:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 08/10/2014 12:29, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>>>> But it would write to the vmcs02, not to the shadow VMCS; the shadow
>>>>> VMCS is active during copy_shadow_to_vmcs12/copy_vmcs12_to_shadow, and
>>>>> at no other time.  It is not clear to me how the VIRTUAL_INTR_PENDING
>>>>> bit ended up from the vmcs02 (where it is perfectly fine) to the vmcs12.
>>> Well, but somehow that bit ends up in vmcs12, that's a fact. Also that
>>> the proble disappears when shadowing is disabled. Need to think about
>>> the path again. Maybe there is just a bug, not a conceptual issue.
>> 
>> Yeah, and at this point we cannot actually exclude a processor bug.  Can
>> you check that the bit is not in the shadow VMCS just before vmrun, or
>> just after enable_irq_window?
>> 
>> Having a kvm-unit-tests testcase could also be of some help.
>
>As usual, this was a nasty race that involved some concurrent VCPUs and
>proper host load, so hard to write unit tests...
>
>diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>index 04fa1b8..d6bcaca 100644
>--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>@@ -6417,6 +6417,8 @@ static void copy_shadow_to_vmcs12(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> 	const unsigned long *fields = shadow_read_write_fields;
> 	const int num_fields = max_shadow_read_write_fields;
> 
>+	preempt_disable();
>+
> 	vmcs_load(shadow_vmcs);
> 
> 	for (i = 0; i < num_fields; i++) {
>@@ -6440,6 +6442,8 @@ static void copy_shadow_to_vmcs12(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> 
> 	vmcs_clear(shadow_vmcs);
> 	vmcs_load(vmx->loaded_vmcs->vmcs);
>+
>+	preempt_enable();
> }
> 
> static void copy_vmcs12_to_shadow(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>@@ -6457,6 +6461,8 @@ static void copy_vmcs12_to_shadow(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> 	u64 field_value = 0;
> 	struct vmcs *shadow_vmcs = vmx->nested.current_shadow_vmcs;
> 
>+	preempt_disable();
>+
> 	vmcs_load(shadow_vmcs);
> 
> 	for (q = 0; q < ARRAY_SIZE(fields); q++) {
>@@ -6483,6 +6489,8 @@ static void copy_vmcs12_to_shadow(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> 
> 	vmcs_clear(shadow_vmcs);
> 	vmcs_load(vmx->loaded_vmcs->vmcs);
>+
>+	preempt_enable();
> }
> 
> /*
>
>No proper patch yet because there might be a smarter approach without
>using the preempt_disable() hammer. But the point is that we temporarily
>load a vmcs without updating loaded_vmcs->vmcs. Now, if some other VCPU
>is scheduling in right in the middle of this, the wrong vmcs will be
>flushed and then reloaded - e.g. a non-shadow vmcs with that interrupt
>window flag set...

If non-shadow vmcs and shadow vmcs can present in one system simultaneously? 

Regards,
Wanpeng Li 

>
>Patch is currently under heavy load testing here, but it looks very good
>as the bug was quickly reproducible before I applied it.
>
>Jan
>
>-- 
>Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
>Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-08 23:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-08  8:29 nVMX: Shadowing of CPU_BASED_VM_EXEC_CONTROL broken Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08  8:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-08  8:54   ` Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08  9:25 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-10-08  9:51   ` Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08 10:20     ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-08 10:29       ` Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08 10:34         ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-08 15:07           ` Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08 15:44             ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-08 16:07               ` Jan Kiszka
2014-10-08 23:34             ` Wanpeng Li [this message]
2014-10-08 23:58               ` Wanpeng Li

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=20141008233447.GA17692@kernel \
    --to=wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bsd@redhat.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).