From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Make sure pfn is not changed for spurious fault
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:23:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6p8aukJgpKqg3Rn@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z6bDZWzePT6CAreU@yzhao56-desk.sh.intel.com>
On Sat, Feb 08, 2025, Yan Zhao wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 07:07:06AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025, Yan Zhao wrote:
> > > Make sure pfn is not changed for a spurious fault by warning in the TDP
> > > MMU. For shadow path, only treat a prefetch fault as spurious when pfn is
> > > not changed, since the rmap removal and add are required when pfn is
> > > changed.
> >
> > I like sanity checks, but I don't like special casing "prefetch" faults like this.
> > KVM should _never_ change the PFN of a shadow-present SPTE. The TDP MMU already
> > BUG()s on this, and mmu_spte_update() WARNs on the transition.
> However, both TDP MMU and mmu_set_spte() return RET_PF_SPURIOUS directly before
> the BUG() in TDP MMU or mmu_spte_update() could be hit.
Ah, that's very different than treating a prefetch fault as !spurious though. I
would be a-ok with this:
if (is_shadow_present_pte(iter->old_spte) &&
(fault->prefetch || is_access_allowed(fault, iter->old_spte)) &&
is_last_spte(iter->old_spte, iter->level)) {
WARN_ON_ONCE(fault->pfn != spte_to_pfn(iter->old_spte));
return RET_PF_SPURIOUS;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-10 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-07 3:06 [PATCH 0/4] Small changes related to prefetch and spurious faults Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 3:07 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Further check old SPTE is leaf for spurious prefetch fault Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 3:08 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86/tdp_mmu: Merge the prefetch into the is_access_allowed() check Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 15:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-08 2:29 ` Yan Zhao
2025-02-10 22:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-07 3:09 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Make sure pfn is not changed for spurious fault Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 15:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-08 2:37 ` Yan Zhao
2025-02-10 22:23 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-02-11 6:48 ` Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 3:09 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Free obsolete roots when pre-faulting SPTEs Yan Zhao
2025-02-07 15:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-08 3:01 ` Yan Zhao
2025-02-10 22:41 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-11 5:38 ` Yan Zhao
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=Z6p8aukJgpKqg3Rn@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox