From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Xiong Y Zhang <xiong.y.zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>,
Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@oracle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/pmu: Fix type length error when reading pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 09:07:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zb0hQfZX89gJOtRX@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9098e8bb-cbe4-432c-98d6-ce96a4f7094f@linux.intel.com>
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024, Xiong Y Zhang wrote:
>
>
> On 2/2/2024 3:36 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 01, 2024, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> >>>>> The PMC is still active while the VM side handle_pmi_common() is not going to handle it?
> >>>>
> >>>> hmm, so the new value is '0', but the old value is non-zero, KVM is
> >>>> supposed to zero out (stop) the fix counter), but it skips it. This
> >>>> leads to the counter continuously increasing until it overflows, but
> >>>> guest PMU thought it had disabled it. That's why you got this warning?
> >>>
> >>> No, that can't happen, and KVM would have a massive bug if that were the case.
> >>> The truncation can _only_ cause bits to disappear, it can't magically make bits
> >>> appear, i.e. the _only_ way this can cause a problem is for KVM to incorrectly
> >>> think a PMC is being disabled.
> >>
> >> The reason why the bug does not happen is because there is global
> >> control. So disabling a counter will be effectively done in the global
> >> disable part, ie., when guest PMU writes to MSR 0x38f.
> >
> >
> >>> fixed PMC is disabled. KVM will pause the counter in reprogram_counter(), and
> >>> then leave the perf event paused counter as pmc_event_is_allowed() will return
> >>> %false due to the PMC being locally disabled.
> >>>
> >>> But in this case, _if_ the counter is actually enabled, KVM will simply reprogram
> >>> the PMC. Reprogramming is unnecessary and wasteful, but it's not broken.
> >>
> >> no, if the counter is actually enabled, but then it is assigned to
> >> old_fixed_ctr_ctrl, the value is truncated. When control goes to the
> >> check at the time of disabling the counter, KVM thinks it is disabled,
> >> since the value is already truncated to 0. So KVM will skip by saying
> >> "oh, the counter is already disabled, why reprogram? No need!".
> >
> > Ooh, I had them backwards. KVM can miss 1=>0, but not 0=>1. I'll apply this
> > for 6.8; does this changelog work for you?
> >
> > Use a u64 instead of a u8 when taking a snapshot of pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl
> > when reprogramming fixed counters, as truncating the value results in KVM
> > thinking all fixed counters, except counter 0,
> each counter has four bits in fixed_ctr_ctrl, here u8 could cover counter 0
> and counter 1, so "except counter 0" can be modified to "except counter 0 and
> 1"
Ugh, math. I'll adjust it to:
Use a u64 instead of a u8 when taking a snapshot of pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl
when reprogramming fixed counters, as truncating the value results in KVM
thinking fixed counter 2 is already disabled (the bug also affects fixed
counters 3+, but KVM doesn't yet support those). As a result, if the
guest disables fixed counter 2, KVM will get a false negative and fail to
reprogram/disable emulation of the counter, which can leads to incorrect
counts and spurious PMIs in the guest.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-02 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-23 22:12 [PATCH] KVM: x86/pmu: Fix type length error when reading pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl Mingwei Zhang
2024-01-31 15:43 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-31 17:02 ` Dongli Zhang
2024-01-31 17:13 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-02-01 17:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-01 18:30 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-02-01 19:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-01 19:53 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-02-01 22:53 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-01 23:00 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-02-02 3:25 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-02-02 17:07 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-02-03 0:11 ` 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=Zb0hQfZX89gJOtRX@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=dongli.zhang@oracle.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mizhang@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=xiong.y.zhang@linux.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