kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
	<kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
	Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
	Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
	"Yan Y Zhao" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
	Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>,
	"binbin.wu@linux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: TDX: Add sub-ioctl KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 14:06:31 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJLwFaJ5g2WaMwql@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aIzu4q_7yBmCIOWK@google.com>

>Oof.  And as Chao pointed out[*], removing the vm_dead check would allow creating
>and running vCPUs in a dead VM, which is most definitely not desirable.  Squashing
>the vCPU creation case is easy enough if we keep vm_dead but still generally allow
>ioctls, and it's probably worth doing that no matter what (to plug the hole where
>pending vCPU creations could succeed):
>
>diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>index d477a7fda0ae..941d2c32b7dc 100644
>--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>@@ -4207,6 +4207,11 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long id)
> 
>        mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> 
>+       if (kvm->vm_dead) {
>+               r = -EIO;
>+               goto unlock_vcpu_destroy;
>+       }
>+

yes. this addresses my concern.

>        if (kvm_get_vcpu_by_id(kvm, id)) {
>                r = -EEXIST;
>                goto unlock_vcpu_destroy;
>
>And then to ensure vCPUs can't do anything, check KVM_REQ_VM_DEAD after acquiring
>vcpu->mutex.
>
>diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>index 6c07dd423458..883077eee4ce 100644
>--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>@@ -4433,6 +4433,12 @@ static long kvm_vcpu_ioctl(struct file *filp,
> 
>        if (mutex_lock_killable(&vcpu->mutex))
>                return -EINTR;
>+
>+       if (kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_VM_DEAD, vcpu)) {
>+               r = -EIO;
>+               goto out;
>+       }
>+
>        switch (ioctl) {
>        case KVM_RUN: {
>                struct pid *oldpid;
>
>
>That should address all TDVPS paths (I hope), and I _think_ would address all
>MMU-related paths as well?  E.g. prefault requires a vCPU.
>
>Disallowing (most) vCPU ioctls but not all VM ioctls on vm_dead isn't great ABI
>(understatement), but I think we need/want the above changes even if we keep the
>general vm_dead restriction.  And given the extremely ad hoc behavior of taking
>kvm->lock for VM ioctls, trying to enforce vm_dead for "all" VM ioctls seems like
>a fool's errand.
>
>So I'm leaning toward keeping "KVM: Reject ioctls only if the VM is bugged, not
>simply marked dead" (with a different shortlog+changelog), but keeping vm_dead
>(and not introducing kvm_tdx.vm_terminated).

Sounds good to me.

With kvm_tdx.vm_terminated removed, we should consider adding a comment above
the is_hkid_assigned() check in tdx_sept_remove_private_spte() to clarify that
!is_hkid_assigned() indicates the guest has been terminated, allowing private
pages to be reclaimed directly without zapping.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-06  6:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-29 19:33 [PATCH 0/5] KVM: Drop vm_dead, pivot on vm_bugged for -EIO Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 19:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: Never clear KVM_REQ_VM_DEAD from a vCPU's requests Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 19:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: TDX: Exit with MEMORY_FAULT on unexpected pending S-EPT Violation Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 22:27   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-07-29 22:54     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 22:58       ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-07-29 23:08         ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 23:13           ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-07-30  5:45         ` Yan Zhao
2025-07-30  5:55     ` Yan Zhao
2025-07-30 12:59       ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-07-30  2:07   ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-07-30  6:04     ` Yan Zhao
2025-07-29 19:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: Reject ioctls only if the VM is bugged, not simply marked dead Sean Christopherson
2025-07-30  1:20   ` Chao Gao
2025-07-29 19:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: selftests: Use for-loop to handle all successful SEV migrations Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 19:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: TDX: Add sub-ioctl KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM Sean Christopherson
2025-08-01 13:56   ` Adrian Hunter
2025-08-01 16:44     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-08-03 17:41       ` Adrian Hunter
2025-08-06  6:06       ` Chao Gao [this message]

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=aJLwFaJ5g2WaMwql@intel.com \
    --to=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=binbin.wu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=vannapurve@google.com \
    --cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    --cc=yan.y.zhao@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).