From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Brilliant Hanabi <moehanabichan@gmail.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
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>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Check irqchip mode before create PIT
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 08:32:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZbE7kd9W8csPRjvU@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240124160248.3077-1-moehanabichan@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024, Brilliant Hanabi wrote:
> As the kvm api(https://docs.kernel.org/virt/kvm/api.html) reads,
> KVM_CREATE_PIT2 call is only valid after enabling in-kernel irqchip
> support via KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP.
>
> Without this check, I can create PIT first and enable irqchip-split
> then, which may cause the PIT invalid because of lacking of in-kernel
> PIC to inject the interrupt.
Does this cause actual problems beyond the PIT not working for the guest? E.g.
does it put the host kernel at risk? If the only problem is that the PIT doesn't
work as expected, I'm tempted to tweak the docs to say that KVM's PIT emulation
won't work without an in-kernel I/O APIC. Rejecting the ioctl could theoertically
break misconfigured setups that happen to work, e.g. because the guest never uses
the PIT.
> Signed-off-by: Brilliant Hanabi <moehanabichan@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 27e23714e960..3edc8478310f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -7016,6 +7016,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg)
> r = -EEXIST;
> if (kvm->arch.vpit)
> goto create_pit_unlock;
> + if (!pic_in_kernel(kvm))
> + goto create_pit_unlock;
-EEXIST is not an appropriate errno.
> r = -ENOMEM;
> kvm->arch.vpit = kvm_create_pit(kvm, u.pit_config.flags);
> if (kvm->arch.vpit)
> --
> 2.39.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-24 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-24 16:02 [PATCH] KVM: x86: Check irqchip mode before create PIT Brilliant Hanabi
2024-01-24 16:32 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-01-24 17:02 ` moehanabi
2024-01-24 17:43 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-24 19:01 ` Brilliant Hanabi
2024-01-24 23:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-25 5:08 ` [PATCH v2] " Tengfei Yu
2024-01-26 18:12 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-01-26 18:11 ` Re: Re: [PATCH] " 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=ZbE7kd9W8csPRjvU@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=moehanabichan@gmail.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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