From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/45] KVM: Introduce NR/NW/NX memory attributes
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2026 18:04:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-193900@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261102174512.8903-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] KVM: wrong macro in #else of kvm_supports_memory_protection_attr()
- [Medium] KVM: x86: selecting KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES on 32-bit breaks build
--
commit 7813791b6014f78cd1b4dde881abb82a354594d5
Author: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@amazon.com>
KVM: Introduce NR/NW/NX memory attributes
This commit introduces the KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_NR, KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_NW,
and KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_NX memory attributes to map guest physical memory
regions as non-readable, non-writable, and/or non-executable, and adds basic
support on x86.
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260918135030.171564-14-pbonzini@redhat.com
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig
> index 1719059570fb7..3cde8bc5ff016 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig
> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ config KVM_X86
> select KVM_GENERIC_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY
> select KVM_WERROR if WERROR
> select KVM_GUEST_MEMFD if X86_64
> + select KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
[Severity: Medium]
Does selecting KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES unconditionally in config KVM_X86
break 32-bit x86 builds?
Previously, KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES was selected by KVM_PRIVATE_MEMATTR_VM,
which only depended on 64-bit options (KVM_SW_PROTECTED_VM, KVM_INTEL_TDX,
and KVM_AMD_SEV). Selecting it unconditionally under KVM_X86 enables
CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES on 32-bit x86 builds, which triggers the
compile-time assertion in virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:
kvm_vm_ioctl_set_mem_attributes() {
...
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(attrs->attributes) != sizeof(unsigned long));
}
Also, if KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES is gated on X86_64, removing the
CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES guards in arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c and
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c (around kvm_mmu_init_memslot_memory_attributes() in
kvm_alloc_memslot_metadata(), and the calls to kvm_get_vm_memory_attributes()
and kvm_range_has_vm_memory_attributes() in mmu.c) will leave those callers
referencing symbols that have no fallback definitions when
CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES is disabled.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index 3d0293ebc864a..8442fb29a1ee8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -726,6 +726,15 @@ static inline int kvm_arch_vcpu_memslots_id(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr
> +bool kvm_arch_mem_attributes_supported_prot(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long attrs);
> +#else
> +static inline bool kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +#endif
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index 17341c689d11a..717d7aec9a6c9 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -2473,13 +2473,28 @@ static u64 kvm_supports_private_mem(struct kvm *kvm)
> #define kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm) false
> #endif
>
> +
> +#ifdef kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr
> +static u64 kvm_supports_memory_protection_attr(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + return !kvm || kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr(kvm);
> +}
> +#else
> +#define kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm) false
> +#endif
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> u64 kvm_supported_vm_mem_attributes(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> - if (gmem_in_place_conversion || !kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm))
> - return 0;
> + u64 supported_attrs = 0;
> +
> + if (kvm_supports_memory_protection_attr(kvm))
> + supported_attrs |= KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PROT;
[Severity: Medium]
Should the #else branch here define kvm_supports_memory_protection_attr(kvm)
instead of kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm)?
On architectures that do not define kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr as a
preprocessor macro, the #else branch defines kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm)
as false. This leaves kvm_supports_memory_protection_attr() undeclared when
called by kvm_supported_vm_mem_attributes(), while also overriding the
preceding definition of kvm_supports_private_mem(kvm) on architectures that
define kvm_arch_has_private_mem.
In addition, when kvm_arch_has_memory_protection_attr is not defined as a
macro, include/linux/kvm_host.h omits the prototype for
kvm_arch_mem_attributes_supported_prot(), which is still compiled
unconditionally as a non-static __weak function in virt/kvm/kvm_main.c when
CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES is enabled, causing a missing-prototype
warning.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261102174130.8779-1-pbonzini@redhat.com?part=17
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-02 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-02 17:40 [PATCH v4 00/45] KVM: x86: Introduce memory protection attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 01/45] KVM: nVMX/nSVM: check unconditionally whether CR3 is valid Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 02/45] KVM: x86/hyperv: do not overwrite hc->ingpa for SIGNAL_EVENT hypercall Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 03/45] KVM: x86: apply nGPA->GPA translation to KVM_HC_CLOCK_PAIRING Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 04/45] KVM: x86/emulate: Check TSS busy-bit writes during task switches Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 05/45] KVM: loongarch: do full validity check on the gfn-to-hva cache Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 06/45] KVM: selftests: Test address translation for Hyper-V direct L2 hypercalls Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 07/45] KVM: selftests: Take into account mixed memory fault flags Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:50 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 08/45] selftests: kvm: drop TEST_ASSERT_SUPPORTED_ATTRIBUTES Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 09/45] KVM: Define and communicate KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT RWX flags to userspace Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:55 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 10/45] KVM: x86: Introduce memory fault on invalid hypercalls reads/writes Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 11/45] KVM: selftests: test hypercall memory fault exits Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:58 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 12/45] KVM: x86/mmu: intersect writability from __kvm_faultin_pfn with fault->map_writable Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 13/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend map_writable to a full ACC_* mask Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 14/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Init memslot hugepage information for non-private_mem VMs too Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:40 ` [PATCH 15/45] KVM: VMX: return error from kvm_set_cr* Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:41 ` [PATCH 16/45] KVM: adjust for presence of more than one attribute Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 17/45] KVM: Introduce NR/NW/NX memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:04 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-03 9:25 ` kernel test robot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 18/45] KVM: Include memory protections in result of gfn->hva conversion Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 19/45] KVM: Introduce kvm_fetch_guest_page() and use it for x86 Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 20/45] KVM: Take memory protections into account for memory read/write/fetch Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 21/45] KVM: Take memory protections into account for __kvm_vcpu_map Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 22/45] KVM: Encapsulate memattrs array into anonymous struct Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 23/45] KVM: Introduce kvm_check_gen()/kvm_memslots_check_gen() Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:04 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 24/45] KVM: Introduce a generation number for memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 25/45] KVM: Take memory protections into account for accesses with cached gfn->hva Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 26/45] KVM: pfncache: Fail to refresh if it contains memory protections Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 27/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Do not prefetch sptes on gfns backed by memory attributes Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 28/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Take memory protection attributes into account during faults Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 29/45] KVM: x86/emulate: change return value of emulator_io_permitted to int Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 30/45] KVM: x86/emulate: Propagate memory faults to userspace Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 31/45] KVM: x86: "Handle" failed decode when skipping instructions Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:44 ` [PATCH 32/45] KVM: vmx/sgx: make return value of sgx_gva_to_gpa consistent with its callers Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 33/45] KVM: x86: Allow page fault fixup to return errors Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 34/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Adjust gva_to_gpa to allow returning an error Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 35/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Propagate errors from nested GPA translation Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 36/45] KVM: x86: Propagate memory faults through load_pdptrs() Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 37/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Issue memory fault exit if walk failed due to memory attribute Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 38/45] KVM: x86: mark VM as dead after KVM_SET_SREGS fails to load PDPTRs Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:28 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 39/45] KVM: VMX: mark VM dead on shadow VMCS or eVMCS access failures Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:40 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 40/45] KVM: let kvm_arch_post_set_memory_attributes drop mmu_lock Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 41/45] KVM: x86/mmu: Obsolete all roots if memattr contains gPTEs Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 42/45] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory protection attributes test Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 43/45] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory attributes PTE test Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 44/45] KVM: x86: selftests: Introduce memory attributes side-channel tests Paolo Bonzini
2026-11-02 18:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 17:45 ` [PATCH 45/45] KVM: x86: split out parts of load_pdptrs 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=sashiko-outbox-193900@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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