Re: [PATCH v4 09/21] KVM: arm/arm64: mask/unmask daif around VHE guests

Christoffer Dall
2017-11-06T12:40:58Z

On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 05:19:40PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Christoffer,
>
> On 03/11/17 12:45, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 12:14:28PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> >> On 30/10/17 07:40, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 03:57:55PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> >>>> Non-VHE systems take an exception to EL2 in order to world-switch into the
> >>>> guest. When returning from the guest KVM implicitly restores the DAIF
> >>>> flags when it returns to the kernel at EL1.
> >>>>
> >>>> With VHE none of this exception-level jumping happens, so KVMs
> >>>> world-switch code is exposed to the host kernel's DAIF values, and KVM
> >>>> spills the guest-exit DAIF values back into the host kernel.
> >>>> On entry to a guest we have Debug and SError exceptions unmasked, KVM
> >>>> has switched VBAR but isn't prepared to handle these. On guest exit
> >>>> Debug exceptions are left disabled once we return to the host and will
> >>>> stay this way until we enter user space.
>
>
> >>>> Give me a kick if you want this reworked as a fix (which will then
> >>>> conflict with this series), or a backportable version.
> >>>
> >>> I don't know of any real-world issues where some more graceful handling
> >>> of SErrors would make sense on older kernels, so I'm fine with just
> >>> merging this together with this series.
> >>
> >> What about debug?
>
> > Are we unmasking debug exceptions as we should with this patch?
>
> With this patch, yes, it directly restores the DAIF flags the arch code wants
> for irq-masked process-context. Debug is re-enabled.
>
>
> > If so, I suppose that could be required for something like kgdb or when
> > running KVM as a guest hypervisor (nested).
> >
> > In that case, we should probably provide a backport for stable, if we
> > think people are going to be running older kernels on VHE systems, which
> > they probably are.
>
> Okay, I will produce a backport once this gets merged.
>
>
> >>> On guest exit Debug exceptions are left disabled once we return to the host
> >>> and will stay this way until we enter user space.
>
> > [The indentation seems to indicate I wrote this, but I don't think I
> > did. I'm confused.]
>
> I quoted it from the commit message, but evidently not from this depth-of-reply.
> Sorry for the confusion.
>
>
> >> Today VHE:KVM causes the kernel to run with SError unmasked and debug disabled
> >> until the next return to user-space, whereas previously the kernel expected
> >> SError to be masked and debug enabled.
> >>
> >>
> >> (Reposting just the SError rework without this patch changes the kernel to
> >> expect SError to be unmasked, which isn't making this any worse.)
>
> > I'm sorry, I don't understand this discussion. What is today, and what
>
> English has failed me. I'll try again:
>
> v4.14-rc7 with VHE causes the kernel to run after guest-exit with SError
> unmasked and debug disabled until the next return to user-space.
>
> The arch code expects SError masked and debug enabled.
>
> In your kgdb example, if we switch-to a new task instead of returning to user
> space, it won't hit any break/watchpoints.
>
>
> > is previously, and are you suggesting we drop this patch, or that the
> > rest of this series is somehow going to be applied without this patch?
>
> I reposted just the SError rework, patches 1-10 without this patch.
>
> If merged, this would change the arch code to expect SError to be unmasked from
> process context, leaving just the debug disabled after VHE guest-exit.
>
> I was (hurriedly) trying to work out if reposting the SError-rework without this
> patch made the situation worse.
>
>
> Sorry for the confusion!
>
No worries, and thanks for the explanation.
-Christoffer