public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	roy.hopkins@suse.com,  thomas.lendacky@amd.com,
	ashish.kalra@amd.com, michael.roth@amd.com,  jroedel@suse.de,
	nsaenz@amazon.com, anelkz@amazon.de,
	 James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/29] KVM: do not use online_vcpus to test vCPU validity
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:45:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aEIeBU72WBWnlZdZ@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250401161106.790710-8-pbonzini@redhat.com>

On Tue, Apr 01, 2025, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Different planes can initialize their vCPUs separately, therefore there is
> no single online_vcpus value that can be used to test that a vCPU has
> indeed been fully initialized.
> 
> Use the shiny new plane field instead, initializing it to an invalid value
> (-1) while the vCPU is visible in the xarray but may still disappear if
> the creation fails.

Checking vcpu->plane _in addition_ to online_cpus seems way safer than checking
vcpu->plane _instead_ of online_cpus.  Even if we end up checking only vcpu->plane,
I think that should be a separate patch.

> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c     |  3 ++-
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h | 23 ++++++-----------------
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      | 20 +++++++++++++-------
>  3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> index d7ab8780ab9e..e3a3e7b90c26 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> @@ -260,9 +260,10 @@ static void pit_do_work(struct kthread_work *work)
>  	 * VCPUs and only when LVT0 is in NMI mode.  The interrupt can
>  	 * also be simultaneously delivered through PIC and IOAPIC.
>  	 */
> -	if (atomic_read(&kvm->arch.vapics_in_nmi_mode) > 0)
> +	if (atomic_read(&kvm->arch.vapics_in_nmi_mode) > 0) {

Spurious change (a good change, but noisy for this patch).

>  		kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm)
>  			kvm_apic_nmi_wd_deliver(vcpu);
> +	}
>  }
>  
>  static enum hrtimer_restart pit_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *data)
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index 4d408d1d5ccc..0db27814294f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -992,27 +992,16 @@ static inline struct kvm_io_bus *kvm_get_bus(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus idx)
>  
>  static inline struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_get_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, int i)
>  {
> -	int num_vcpus = atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus);
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Explicitly verify the target vCPU is online, as the anti-speculation
> -	 * logic only limits the CPU's ability to speculate, e.g. given a "bad"
> -	 * index, clamping the index to 0 would return vCPU0, not NULL.
> -	 */
> -	if (i >= num_vcpus)
> +	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = xa_load(&kvm->vcpu_array, i);

newline

> +	if (vcpu && unlikely(vcpu->plane == -1))
>  		return NULL;
>  
> -	i = array_index_nospec(i, num_vcpus);

Don't we still need to prevent speculating into the xarray ?

> -
> -	/* Pairs with smp_wmb() in kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu.  */
> -	smp_rmb();
> -	return xa_load(&kvm->vcpu_array, i);
> +	return vcpu;
>  }
>  
> -#define kvm_for_each_vcpu(idx, vcpup, kvm)				\
> -	if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus))				\
> -		xa_for_each_range(&kvm->vcpu_array, idx, vcpup, 0,	\
> -				  (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus) - 1))
> +#define kvm_for_each_vcpu(idx, vcpup, kvm)			\
> +	xa_for_each(&kvm->vcpu_array, idx, vcpup)		\
> +		if ((vcpup)->plane == -1) ; else		\
>  
>  static inline struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_get_vcpu_by_id(struct kvm *kvm, int id)
>  {
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index e343905e46d8..eba02cb7cc57 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -4186,6 +4186,11 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long id)
>  		goto unlock_vcpu_destroy;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Store an invalid plane number until fully initialized.  xa_insert() has
> +	 * release semantics, which ensures the write is visible to kvm_get_vcpu().
> +	 */
> +	vcpu->plane = -1;
>  	vcpu->vcpu_idx = atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus);
>  	r = xa_insert(&kvm->vcpu_array, vcpu->vcpu_idx, vcpu, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
>  	WARN_ON_ONCE(r == -EBUSY);
> @@ -4195,7 +4200,7 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long id)
>  	/*
>  	 * Now it's all set up, let userspace reach it.  Grab the vCPU's mutex
>  	 * so that userspace can't invoke vCPU ioctl()s until the vCPU is fully
> -	 * visible (per online_vcpus), e.g. so that KVM doesn't get tricked
> +	 * visible (valid vcpu->plane), e.g. so that KVM doesn't get tricked
>  	 * into a NULL-pointer dereference because KVM thinks the _current_
>  	 * vCPU doesn't exist.  As a bonus, taking vcpu->mutex ensures lockdep
>  	 * knows it's taken *inside* kvm->lock.
> @@ -4206,12 +4211,13 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long id)
>  	if (r < 0)
>  		goto kvm_put_xa_erase;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Pairs with smp_rmb() in kvm_get_vcpu.  Store the vcpu
> -	 * pointer before kvm->online_vcpu's incremented value.

Bad me for not updating this comment, but kvm_vcpu_on_spin() also pairs with this
barrier, and needs to be updated to be planes-aware, e.g. this looks like a NULL
pointer deref waiting to happen:

		vcpu = xa_load(&plane->vcpu_array, idx);
		if (!READ_ONCE(vcpu->ready))
			continue;

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-05 22:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-01 16:10 [RFC PATCH 00/29] KVM: VM planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 01/29] Documentation: kvm: introduce "VM plane" concept Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-21 18:43   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 02/29] KVM: API definitions for plane userspace exit Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-04  0:10   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 03/29] KVM: add plane info to structs Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-21 18:57   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-04-21 19:04   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 04/29] KVM: introduce struct kvm_arch_plane Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 05/29] KVM: add plane support to KVM_SIGNAL_MSI Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 06/29] KVM: move mem_attr_array to kvm_plane Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-06 22:50   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 07/29] KVM: do not use online_vcpus to test vCPU validity Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-05 22:45   ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-06-06 13:49     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 08/29] KVM: move vcpu_array to struct kvm_plane Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 09/29] KVM: implement plane file descriptors ioctl and creation Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-21 20:32   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 10/29] KVM: share statistics for same vCPU id on different planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-06 16:23   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-06-06 16:32     ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 11/29] KVM: anticipate allocation of dirty ring Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 12/29] KVM: share dirty ring for same vCPU id on different planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-21 21:51   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 13/29] KVM: implement vCPU creation for extra planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-21 22:08   ` Tom Lendacky
2025-06-05 22:47     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 14/29] KVM: pass plane to kvm_arch_vcpu_create Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 15/29] KVM: x86: pass vcpu to kvm_pv_send_ipi() Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 16/29] KVM: x86: split "if" in __kvm_set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 17/29] KVM: x86: block creating irqchip if planes are active Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 18/29] KVM: x86: track APICv inhibits per plane Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 19/29] KVM: x86: move APIC map to kvm_arch_plane Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 20/29] KVM: x86: add planes support for interrupt delivery Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-06 16:30   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-06-06 16:38     ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 21/29] KVM: x86: add infrastructure to share FPU across planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:10 ` [PATCH 22/29] KVM: x86: implement initial plane support Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 23/29] KVM: x86: extract kvm_post_set_cpuid Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 24/29] KVM: x86: initialize CPUID for non-default planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 25/29] KVM: x86: handle interrupt priorities for planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 26/29] KVM: x86: enable up to 16 planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-06-06 22:41   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 27/29] selftests: kvm: introduce basic test for VM planes Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 28/29] selftests: kvm: add plane infrastructure Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:11 ` [PATCH 29/29] selftests: kvm: add x86-specific plane test Paolo Bonzini
2025-04-01 16:16 ` [RFC PATCH 00/29] KVM: VM planes Sean Christopherson
2025-06-06 16:42 ` Tom Lendacky
2025-08-07 12:34 ` Vaishali Thakkar

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=aEIeBU72WBWnlZdZ@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=anelkz@amazon.de \
    --cc=ashish.kalra@amd.com \
    --cc=jroedel@suse.de \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
    --cc=nsaenz@amazon.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=roy.hopkins@suse.com \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.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