From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@redhat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: arm64: PMU: Don't overwrite PMUSERENR with vcpu loaded
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 10:33:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZDUpfnXi/GwFwFV9@FVFF77S0Q05N> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230408034759.2369068-3-reijiw@google.com>
On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 08:47:59PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> Currently, with VHE, KVM sets ER, CR, SW and EN bits of
> PMUSERENR_EL0 to 1 on vcpu_load(), and saves and restores
> the register value for the host on vcpu_load() and vcpu_put().
> If the value of those bits are cleared on a pCPU with a vCPU
> loaded (armv8pmu_start() would do that when PMU counters are
> programmed for the guest), PMU access from the guest EL0 might
> be trapped to the guest EL1 directly regardless of the current
> PMUSERENR_EL0 value of the vCPU.
>
> Fix this by not letting armv8pmu_start() overwrite PMUSERENR on
> the pCPU on which a vCPU is loaded, and instead updating the
> saved shadow register value for the host, so that the value can
> be restored on vcpu_put() later.
I'm happy with the hook in the PMU code, but I think there's still a race
between an IPI and vcpu_{load,put}() where we can lose an update to
PMUSERERNR_EL0. I tried to point that out in my final question in:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZCwzV7ACl21VbLru@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com/
... but I looks like that wasn't all that clear.
Consider vcpu_load():
void vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
int cpu = get_cpu();
__this_cpu_write(kvm_running_vcpu, vcpu);
preempt_notifier_register(&vcpu->preempt_notifier);
kvm_arch_vcpu_load(vcpu, cpu);
put_cpu();
}
AFAICT that's called with IRQs enabled, and the {get,put}_cpu() calls will only
disable migration/preemption. After the write to kvm_running_vcpu, the code in
kvm_set_pmuserenr() will see that there is a running vcpu, and write to the
host context without updating the real PMUSERENR_EL0 register.
If we take an IPI and call kvm_set_pmuserenr() after the write to
kvm_running_vcpu but before kvm_running_vcpu() completes, the call to
kvm_set_pmuserenr() could update the host context (without updating the real
PMUSERENR_EL0 value) before __activate_traps_common() saves the host value
with:
ctxt_sys_reg(hctxt, PMUSERENR_EL0) = read_sysreg(pmuserenr_el0);
... which would discard the write made by kvm_set_pmuserenr().
Similar can happen in vcpu_put() where an IPI after __deactivate_traps_common()
but before kvm_running_vcpu is cleared would result in kvm_set_pmuserenr()
writing to the host context, but this value would never be written into HW.
Unless I'm missing something (e.g. if interrupts are actually masked during
those windows), I don't think this is a complete fix as-is.
I'm not sure if there is a smart fix for that.
Thanks,
Mark.
> Suggested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Fixes: 83a7a4d643d3 ("arm64: perf: Enable PMU counter userspace access for perf event")
> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 5 +++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
> arch/arm64/kvm/pmu.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index bcd774d74f34..22db2f885c17 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1028,9 +1028,14 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put_debug_state_flags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> #ifdef CONFIG_KVM
> void kvm_set_pmu_events(u32 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr);
> void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u32 clr);
> +bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val);
> #else
> static inline void kvm_set_pmu_events(u32 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr) {}
> static inline void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u32 clr) {}
> +static inline bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> #endif
>
> void kvm_vcpu_load_sysregs_vhe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> index dde06c0f97f3..0fffe4c56c28 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> @@ -741,9 +741,25 @@ static inline u32 armv8pmu_getreset_flags(void)
> return value;
> }
>
> +static void update_pmuserenr(u64 val)
> +{
> + lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> +
> + /*
> + * The current pmuserenr value might be the value for the guest.
> + * If that's the case, have KVM keep tracking of the register value
> + * for the host EL0 so that KVM can restore it before returning to
> + * the host EL0. Otherwise, update the register now.
> + */
> + if (kvm_set_pmuserenr(val))
> + return;
> +
> + write_sysreg(val, pmuserenr_el0);
> +}
> +
> static void armv8pmu_disable_user_access(void)
> {
> - write_sysreg(0, pmuserenr_el0);
> + update_pmuserenr(0);
> }
>
> static void armv8pmu_enable_user_access(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> @@ -759,8 +775,7 @@ static void armv8pmu_enable_user_access(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> armv8pmu_write_evcntr(i, 0);
> }
>
> - write_sysreg(0, pmuserenr_el0);
> - write_sysreg(ARMV8_PMU_USERENR_ER | ARMV8_PMU_USERENR_CR, pmuserenr_el0);
> + update_pmuserenr(ARMV8_PMU_USERENR_ER | ARMV8_PMU_USERENR_CR);
> }
>
> static void armv8pmu_enable_event(struct perf_event *event)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu.c
> index 7887133d15f0..40bb2cb13317 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu.c
> @@ -209,3 +209,23 @@ void kvm_vcpu_pmu_restore_host(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> kvm_vcpu_pmu_enable_el0(events_host);
> kvm_vcpu_pmu_disable_el0(events_guest);
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * With VHE, keep track of the PMUSERENR_EL0 value for the host EL0 on
> + * the pCPU where vCPU is loaded, since PMUSERENR_EL0 is switched to
> + * the value for the guest on vcpu_load(). The value for the host EL0
> + * will be restored on vcpu_put(), before returning to the EL0.
> + *
> + * Return true if KVM takes care of the register. Otherwise return false.
> + */
> +bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val)
> +{
> + struct kvm_cpu_context *hctxt;
> +
> + if (!kvm_arm_support_pmu_v3() || !has_vhe() || !kvm_get_running_vcpu())
> + return false;
> +
> + hctxt = &this_cpu_ptr(&kvm_host_data)->host_ctxt;
> + ctxt_sys_reg(hctxt, PMUSERENR_EL0) = val;
> + return true;
> +}
> --
> 2.40.0.577.gac1e443424-goog
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-11 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-08 3:47 [PATCH v2 0/2] KVM: arm64: PMU: Correct the handling of PMUSERENR_EL0 Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-08 3:47 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: arm64: PMU: Restore the host's PMUSERENR_EL0 Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-08 3:47 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: arm64: PMU: Don't overwrite PMUSERENR with vcpu loaded Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-11 9:33 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2023-04-12 5:14 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-12 9:20 ` Mark Rutland
2023-04-12 10:22 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-04-13 0:07 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-13 8:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-04-15 3:11 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-04-08 9:04 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] KVM: arm64: PMU: Correct the handling of PMUSERENR_EL0 Marc Zyngier
2023-04-11 11:24 ` Will Deacon
2023-04-12 10:29 ` Marc Zyngier
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=ZDUpfnXi/GwFwFV9@FVFF77S0Q05N \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=ricarkol@google.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=shahuang@redhat.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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