From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Hou Wenlong <houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Return emulator error if RDMSR/WRMSR emulation failed
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 18:44:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yw5aeFp9rTs4tkDb@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a845c3e93b2e94b510abbc26ab4ffc0eb8a8b67a.1658913543.git.houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022, Hou Wenlong wrote:
> The return value of emulator_{get|set}_mst_with_filter()
> is confused, since msr access error and emulator error
> are mixed. Although, KVM_MSR_RET_* doesn't conflict with
> X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED at present, it is better to convert
> msr access error to emulator error if error value is
> needed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hou Wenlong <houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 5366f884e9a7..8df89b9c212f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -7908,11 +7908,12 @@ static int emulator_get_msr_with_filter(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
> int r;
>
> r = kvm_get_msr_with_filter(vcpu, msr_index, pdata);
> -
> - if (r && kvm_msr_user_space(vcpu, msr_index, KVM_EXIT_X86_RDMSR, 0,
> - complete_emulated_rdmsr, r)) {
> - /* Bounce to user space */
> - return X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED;
> + if (r) {
> + if (kvm_msr_user_space(vcpu, msr_index, KVM_EXIT_X86_RDMSR, 0,
> + complete_emulated_rdmsr, r))
> + r = X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED;
> + else
> + r = X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
This should be X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT, X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE is used to indicate
that KVM needs to bail all the way to userspace.
I definitely like the idea of converting to X86EMUL_* here instead of spreading
it across these helpers and the emulator, but in that case should convert _all_
types.
And I think it makes sense to opportunistically handle "r < 0" in the get helper.
KVM may not return -errno today, but assuming that will always hold true is
unnecessarily risking.
E.g. what about:
static int emulator_get_msr_with_filter(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
u32 msr_index, u64 *pdata)
{
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
int r;
r = kvm_get_msr_with_filter(vcpu, msr_index, pdata);
if (r < 0)
return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
if (r) {
if (kvm_msr_user_space(vcpu, msr_index, KVM_EXIT_X86_RDMSR, 0,
complete_emulated_rdmsr, r))
return X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED;
else
return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
}
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
static int emulator_set_msr_with_filter(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
u32 msr_index, u64 data)
{
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
int r;
r = kvm_set_msr_with_filter(vcpu, msr_index, data);
if (r < 0)
return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
if (r) {
if (kvm_msr_user_space(vcpu, msr_index, KVM_EXIT_X86_WRMSR, data,
complete_emulated_msr_access, r))
return X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED;
else
return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
}
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
Or maybe even add a helper to do the translation? Can't tell if this is a net
positive or not. It's a bit gratuitous, but it does ensure consistent behavior
for RDMSR vs. WRMSR.
static int emulator_handle_msr_return(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu *, int r,
u32 msr, u64 data, u32 exit_reason,
int (*comp)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu))
{
if (r < 0)
return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
if (r) {
if (kvm_msr_user_space(vcpu, msr, exit_reason, data, comp, r))
return X86EMUL_IO_NEEDED;
else
return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
}
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
static int emulator_get_msr_with_filter(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
u32 msr_index, u64 *pdata)
{
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
int r;
r = kvm_get_msr_with_filter(vcpu, msr_index, pdata);
return emulator_handle_msr_return(vcpu, r, msr_index, 0,
KVM_EXIT_X86_RDMSR,
complete_emulated_rdmsr);
}
static int emulator_set_msr_with_filter(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
u32 msr_index, u64 data)
{
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
int r;
r = kvm_set_msr_with_filter(vcpu, msr_index, data);
return emulator_handle_msr_return(vcpu, r, msr_index, data,
KVM_EXIT_X86_WRMSR,
complete_emulated_msr_access);
}
And then the emulator side of things can be:
static int em_wrmsr(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
{
u64 msr_index = reg_read(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RCX);
u64 msr_data;
int r;
msr_data = (u32)reg_read(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RAX)
| ((u64)reg_read(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RDX) << 32);
r = ctxt->ops->set_msr_with_filter(ctxt, msr_index, msr_data);
if (r == X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT)
return emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
return r;
}
static int em_rdmsr(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
{
u64 msr_index = reg_read(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RCX);
u64 msr_data;
int r;
r = ctxt->ops->get_msr_with_filter(ctxt, msr_index, &msr_data);
if (r == X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT)
return emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
if (r == X86EMUL_CONTINUE) {
*reg_write(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RAX) = (u32)msr_data;
*reg_write(ctxt, VCPU_REGS_RDX) = msr_data >> 32;
}
return r;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-30 18:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-28 8:25 [PATCH 0/2] Add missing trace points in emulator path Hou Wenlong
2022-07-28 8:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Return emulator error if RDMSR/WRMSR emulation failed Hou Wenlong
2022-08-30 18:44 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-08-31 3:17 ` Hou Wenlong
2022-07-28 8:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: Add missing trace points for RDMSR/WRMSR in emulator path Hou Wenlong
2022-08-30 19:05 ` Sean Christopherson
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=Yw5aeFp9rTs4tkDb@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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