From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Check PDPTRs before allocating PAE roots
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 16:27:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YG8u5zv/5+WCYEVT@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b7129ed-0377-7b91-c741-44ac2202081a@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/04/21 17:48, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Freaking PDPTRs. I was really hoping we could keep the lock and pages_available()
> > logic outside of the helpers. What if kvm_mmu_load() reads the PDPTRs and
> > passes them into mmu_alloc_shadow_roots()? Or is that too ugly?
>
> The patch I have posted (though untested) tries to do that in a slightly
> less ugly way by pushing make_mmu_pages_available down to mmu_alloc_*_roots.
Yeah, I agree it's less ugly. It would be nice to not duplicate that code, but
it's probably not worth the ugliness. :-/
For your approach, can we put the out label after the success path? Setting
mmu->root_pgd isn't wrong per se, but doing so might mislead future readers into
thinking that it's functionally necessary.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index efb41f31e80a..93f97d0a9e2e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -3244,6 +3244,13 @@ static int mmu_alloc_direct_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
u8 shadow_root_level = mmu->shadow_root_level;
hpa_t root;
unsigned i;
+ int r;
+
+ write_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
+
+ r = make_mmu_pages_available(vcpu);
+ if (r)
+ goto out_unlock;
if (is_tdp_mmu_enabled(vcpu->kvm)) {
root = kvm_tdp_mmu_get_vcpu_root_hpa(vcpu);
@@ -3252,8 +3259,10 @@ static int mmu_alloc_direct_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
root = mmu_alloc_root(vcpu, 0, 0, shadow_root_level, true);
mmu->root_hpa = root;
} else if (shadow_root_level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL) {
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->pae_root))
- return -EIO;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->pae_root)) {
+ r = -EIO;
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
for (i = 0; i < 4; ++i) {
WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_VALID_PAE_ROOT(mmu->pae_root[i]));
@@ -3266,13 +3275,15 @@ static int mmu_alloc_direct_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
mmu->root_hpa = __pa(mmu->pae_root);
} else {
WARN_ONCE(1, "Bad TDP root level = %d\n", shadow_root_level);
- return -EIO;
+ r = -EIO;
+ goto out_unlock;
}
/* root_pgd is ignored for direct MMUs. */
mmu->root_pgd = 0;
-
- return 0;
+out_unlock:
+ write_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
+ return r;
}
static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
@@ -3281,7 +3292,7 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
u64 pdptrs[4], pm_mask;
gfn_t root_gfn, root_pgd;
hpa_t root;
- int i;
+ int i, r;
root_pgd = mmu->get_guest_pgd(vcpu);
root_gfn = root_pgd >> PAGE_SHIFT;
@@ -3289,6 +3300,10 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (mmu_check_root(vcpu, root_gfn))
return 1;
+ /*
+ * On SVM, reading PDPTRs might access guest memory, which might fault
+ * and thus might sleep. Grab the PDPTRs before acquiring mmu_lock.
+ */
if (mmu->root_level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL) {
for (i = 0; i < 4; ++i) {
pdptrs[i] = mmu->get_pdptr(vcpu, i);
@@ -3300,6 +3315,12 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
}
}
+ write_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
+
+ r = make_mmu_pages_available(vcpu);
+ if (r)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
/*
* Do we shadow a long mode page table? If so we need to
* write-protect the guests page table root.
@@ -3311,8 +3332,10 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
goto set_root_pgd;
}
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->pae_root))
- return -EIO;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->pae_root)) {
+ r = -EIO;
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
/*
* We shadow a 32 bit page table. This may be a legacy 2-level
@@ -3323,8 +3346,10 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (mmu->shadow_root_level == PT64_ROOT_4LEVEL) {
pm_mask |= PT_ACCESSED_MASK | PT_WRITABLE_MASK | PT_USER_MASK;
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->lm_root))
- return -EIO;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!mmu->lm_root)) {
+ r = -EIO;
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
mmu->lm_root[0] = __pa(mmu->pae_root) | pm_mask;
}
@@ -3352,8 +3377,9 @@ static int mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
set_root_pgd:
mmu->root_pgd = root_pgd;
-
- return 0;
+out_unlock:
+ write_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
+ return r;
}
static int mmu_alloc_special_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
@@ -4852,14 +4878,10 @@ int kvm_mmu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
r = mmu_alloc_special_roots(vcpu);
if (r)
goto out;
- write_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
- if (make_mmu_pages_available(vcpu))
- r = -ENOSPC;
- else if (vcpu->arch.mmu->direct_map)
+ if (vcpu->arch.mmu->direct_map)
r = mmu_alloc_direct_roots(vcpu);
else
r = mmu_alloc_shadow_roots(vcpu);
- write_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
if (r)
goto out;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 1:10 [PATCH v2 00/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Lots of bug fixes Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 01/17] KVM: nSVM: Set the shadow root level to the TDP level for nested NPT Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 02/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Alloc page for PDPTEs when shadowing 32-bit NPT with 64-bit Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 03/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Capture 'mmu' in a local variable when allocating roots Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 04/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Allocate the lm_root before allocating PAE roots Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 05/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Allocate pae_root and lm_root pages in dedicated helper Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 17:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 06/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Ensure MMU pages are available when allocating roots Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 07/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Check PDPTRs before allocating PAE roots Sean Christopherson
2021-04-08 11:15 ` Wanpeng Li
2021-04-08 12:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-08 15:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-08 15:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-08 16:27 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2021-04-08 16:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 08/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Fix and unconditionally enable WARNs to detect PAE leaks Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 09/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Use '0' as the one and only value for an invalid PAE root Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 17:52 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-05 18:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 18:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 10/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Set the C-bit in the PDPTRs and LM pseudo-PDPTRs Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 11/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Mark the PAE roots as decrypted for shadow paging Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 17:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-03-05 18:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 12/17] KVM: SVM: Don't strip the C-bit from CR2 on #PF interception Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 13/17] KVM: nVMX: Defer the MMU reload to the normal path on an EPTP switch Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 14/17] KVM: x86: Defer the MMU unload to the normal path on an global INVPCID Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:10 ` [PATCH v2 15/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Unexport MMU load/unload functions Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:11 ` [PATCH v2 16/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Sync roots after MMU load iff load as successful Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 1:11 ` [PATCH v2 17/17] KVM: x86/mmu: WARN on NULL pae_root or lm_root, or bad shadow root level Sean Christopherson
2021-03-05 17:53 ` [PATCH v2 00/17] KVM: x86/mmu: Lots of bug fixes Paolo Bonzini
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=YG8u5zv/5+WCYEVT@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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