From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>,
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>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: x86: Use fast path for Xen timer delivery
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 18:58:22 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZcLxzrbvSs0jNeR4@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19a1ac538e6cb1b479122df677909fb49fedbb28.camel@infradead.org>
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-02-06 at 10:41 -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >
> > This has an obvious-in-hindsight recursive deadlock bug. If KVM actually needs
> > to inject a timer IRQ, and the fast path fails, i.e. the gpc is invalid,
> > kvm_xen_set_evtchn() will attempt to acquire xen.xen_lock, which is already held
>
> Hm, right. In fact, kvm_xen_set_evtchn() shouldn't actually *need* the
> xen_lock in an ideal world; it's only taking it in order to work around
> the fact that the gfn_to_pfn_cache doesn't have its *own* self-
> sufficient locking. I have patches for that...
>
> I think the *simplest* of the "patches for that" approaches is just to
> use the gpc->refresh_lock to cover all activate, refresh and deactivate
> calls. I was waiting for Paul's series to land before sending that one,
> but I'll work on it today, and double-check my belief that we can then
> just drop xen_lock from kvm_xen_set_evtchn().
While I definitely want to get rid of arch.xen.xen_lock, I don't want to address
the deadlock by relying on adding more locking to the gpc code. I want a teeny
tiny patch that is easy to review and backport. Y'all are *proably* the only
folks that care about Xen emulation, but even so, that's not a valid reason for
taking a roundabout way to fixing a deadlock.
Can't we simply not take xen_lock in kvm_xen_vcpu_get_attr() It holds vcpu->mutex
so it's mutually exclusive with kvm_xen_vcpu_set_attr(), and I don't see any other
flows other than vCPU destruction that deactivate (or change) the gpc.
And the worst case scenario is that if _userspace_ is being stupid, userspace gets
a stale GPA.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
index 4b4e738c6f1b..50aa28b9ffc4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
@@ -973,8 +973,6 @@ int kvm_xen_vcpu_get_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_xen_vcpu_attr *data)
{
int r = -ENOENT;
- mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.xen.xen_lock);
-
switch (data->type) {
case KVM_XEN_VCPU_ATTR_TYPE_VCPU_INFO:
if (vcpu->arch.xen.vcpu_info_cache.active)
@@ -1083,7 +1081,6 @@ int kvm_xen_vcpu_get_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_xen_vcpu_attr *data)
break;
}
- mutex_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.xen.xen_lock);
return r;
}
If that seems to risky, we could go with an ugly and hacky, but conservative:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
index 4b4e738c6f1b..456d05c5b18a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
@@ -1052,7 +1052,9 @@ int kvm_xen_vcpu_get_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_xen_vcpu_attr *data)
*/
if (vcpu->arch.xen.timer_expires) {
hrtimer_cancel(&vcpu->arch.xen.timer);
+ mutex_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.xen.xen_lock);
kvm_xen_inject_timer_irqs(vcpu);
+ mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.xen.xen_lock);
}
data->u.timer.port = vcpu->arch.xen.timer_virq;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-07 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-30 13:58 [PATCH v3] KVM: x86: Use fast path for Xen timer delivery David Woodhouse
2023-10-02 10:35 ` Paul Durrant
2023-10-02 17:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-10-02 17:05 ` David Woodhouse
2023-10-05 1:29 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-06 18:41 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-06 18:51 ` David Woodhouse
2024-02-07 2:58 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-02-07 3:29 ` David Woodhouse
2024-02-07 4:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-07 4:36 ` David Woodhouse
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=ZcLxzrbvSs0jNeR4@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@xen.org \
--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