From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 25/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Obsolete all roots if memattr contains gPTEs
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:43:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260918084347.E2CE81F00893@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260918081543.139871-26-pbonzini@redhat.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] kvm: mixed-attribute hugepage mapping via race when mmu_lock is dropped
- [High] kvm: soft lockup in kvm_arch_post_set_memory_attributes() due to unbounded loop
--
commit 33f579fe7310efff8ad87a283b4a1e970511e847
Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: KVM: x86/mmu: Obsolete all roots if memattr contains gPTEs
This commit introduces a mechanism to invalidate all MMU roots when applying
memory protection attributes against a GPTE page. It splits the fast zap
operation into a locked front-half and an unlocked back-half.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index 097095f71d605..d658cfe31cd9b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -8320,9 +8321,40 @@ bool kvm_arch_post_set_memory_attributes(struct kvm *kvm,
> hugepage_set_mixed(slot, gfn, level);
> }
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * There are special considerations when applying an memory protection
> + * attibute against a GPTE page. If set read-only, access/dirty bits
> + * within that page shouldn't be updated. If set non-accesible,
> + * accessing a virtual address that requires traversing that GPTE page
> + * should fault.
> + *
> + * On TDP enabled guests, the CPU faults on the GPTE address upon
> + * detecting such a situation.
> + *
> + * On non-TDP, upon detecting this situation, and based on the fact it
> + * should be a rare occasion, invalidate all the mmu roots.
> + */
> + for (gfn_t gfn = range->start; gfn < range->end; gfn++) {
[Severity: High]
Could this loop cause a host soft lockup and RCU stalls?
If host userspace issues a KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES ioctl with a massive
memory range, this loop will iterate over the entire guest-controlled GFN
range.
Because it executes hash table lookups via for_each_gfn_valid_sp_with_gptes()
while holding mmu_lock for write without any cond_resched(), could a
malicious guest or VMM orchestrate massive memslot updates to degrade host
availability?
> + for_each_gfn_valid_sp_with_gptes(kvm, sp, gfn) {
> + __kvm_mmu_zap_all_fast_front_half(kvm);
[Severity: Critical]
Can this lead to memory isolation breakage by allowing mixed-attribute
hugepage mappings?
During kvm_vm_set_mem_attributes(), kvm_handle_gfn_range() is called with
post_set_range. When processing the first memslot, it triggers range->on_lock,
which maps to kvm_mmu_invalidate_end() and sets mmu_invalidate_in_progress
to 0.
When __kvm_mmu_zap_all_fast_front_half() is called here, it can drop and
reacquire mmu_lock via cond_resched_rwlock_write().
While the lock is dropped and mmu_invalidate_in_progress is 0, could a
concurrent page fault on a subsequent memslot proceed? If that memslot's
disallow_lpage flag hasn't been updated yet, KVM might map a hugepage using
the specific faulted GFN's attributes, bypassing the mixed attributes in the
xarray entirely.
> + return false;
> + }
> + }
> return false;
> }
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260918081543.139871-1-pbonzini@redhat.com?part=25
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-18 8:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-18 8:15 [PATCH v2 00/28] KVM: x86: Introduce memory protection attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 01/28] KVM: selftests: Take into account mixed memory fault flags Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 02/28] KVM: Define and communicate KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT RWX flags to userspace Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 03/28] KVM: selftests: Test address translation for Hyper-V direct L2 hypercalls Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 04/28] KVM: apply nGPA->GPA translation to KVM_HC_CLOCK_PAIRING Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 05/28] KVM: x86: Introduce memory fault on invalid hypercalls reads/writes Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 06/28] KVM: selftests: test hypercall memory fault exits Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 07/28] KVM: x86/mmu: intersect writability from __kvm_faultin_pfn with fault->map_writable Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 08/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend map_writable to a full ACC_* mask Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 09/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Init memslot hugepage information for non-private_mem VMs too Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 10/28] KVM: pass kvm == NULL case to kvm_arch_has_private_mem Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 11/28] KVM: adjust for presence of more than one attribute Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 12/28] KVM: Introduce NR/NW/NX memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 13/28] KVM: Include memory protections in result of gfn->hva conversion Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 14/28] KVM: Introduce kvm_fetch_guest_page() and use it for x86 Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 15/28] KVM: Take memory protections into account for memory read/write/fetch Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 16/28] KVM: Encapsulate memattrs array into anonymous struct Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 17/28] KVM: Introduce kvm_check_gen()/kvm_memslots_check_gen() Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 18/28] KVM: Introduce a generation number for memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 19/28] KVM: Take memory protections into account for accesses with cached gfn->hva Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:38 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 20/28] KVM: pfncache: Fail to refresh if it contains memory protections Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 21/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Take memory protection attributes into account during faults Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:46 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 22/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Issue memory fault exit if walk failed due to memory attribute Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:37 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 23/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Do not update accessed/dirty if guest PTE is read-only Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 24/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Do not prefetch sptes on gfns backed by memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 25/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Obsolete all roots if memattr contains gPTEs Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:43 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 26/28] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory protection attributes test Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 27/28] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory attributes PTE test Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 28/28] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory attributes side-channel tests Paolo Bonzini
2026-09-18 8:43 ` 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=20260918084347.E2CE81F00893@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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