From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR MIPS \(KVM/mips\)"
<kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR MIPS \(KVM/mips\)"
<linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR RISC-V \(KVM/riscv\)"
<kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com,
"moderated list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 \(KVM/arm64\)"
<kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>, Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Cache the access bits of shadowed translations
Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 19:47:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnV7QUOkYVg+Ktnl@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220422210546.458943-16-dmatlack@google.com>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022, David Matlack wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> index a8a755e1561d..97bf53b29b88 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> @@ -978,7 +978,8 @@ static gpa_t FNAME(gva_to_gpa)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu *mmu,
> }
>
> /*
> - * Using the cached information from sp->gfns is safe because:
> + * Using the information in sp->shadowed_translation (kvm_mmu_page_get_gfn()
> + * and kvm_mmu_page_get_access()) is safe because:
> * - The spte has a reference to the struct page, so the pfn for a given gfn
> * can't change unless all sptes pointing to it are nuked first.
> *
> @@ -1052,12 +1053,15 @@ static int FNAME(sync_page)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> if (sync_mmio_spte(vcpu, &sp->spt[i], gfn, pte_access))
> continue;
>
> - if (gfn != sp->gfns[i]) {
> + if (gfn != kvm_mmu_page_get_gfn(sp, i)) {
> drop_spte(vcpu->kvm, &sp->spt[i]);
> flush = true;
> continue;
> }
>
> + if (pte_access != kvm_mmu_page_get_access(sp, i))
> + kvm_mmu_page_set_access(sp, i, pte_access);
Very tangentially related, and more an FYI than anything else (I'll send a patch
separately)... Replying here because this got me wondering about the validity of
pte_access.
There's an existing bug for nEPT here, which I proved after 3 hours of fighting
with KUT's EPT tests (ugh).
1. execute-only EPT entries are supported
2. L1 creates a upper-level RW EPTE and a 4kb leaf RW EPTE
3. L2 accesses the address; KVM installs a SPTE
4. L1 modifies the leaf EPTE to be X-only, and does INVEPT
5. ept_sync_page() creates a SPTE with pte_access=0 / RWX=0
The logic for pte_access (just above this code) is:
pte_access = sp->role.access;
pte_access &= FNAME(gpte_access)(gpte);
The parent guest EPTE is 'RW', and so sp->role.access is 'RW'. When the new 'X'
EPTE is ANDed with the 'RW' parent protections, the result is a RWX=0 SPTE. This
is only possible if execute-only is supported, because otherwise PTEs are always
readable, i.e. shadow_present_mask is non-zero.
I don't think anything bad happens per se, but it's odd to have a !PRESENT in
hardware, shadow-present SPTE. I think the correct/easiest fix is:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
index b025decf610d..f8ea881cfce6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
@@ -1052,7 +1052,7 @@ static int FNAME(sync_page)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
if (sync_mmio_spte(vcpu, &sp->spt[i], gfn, pte_access))
continue;
- if (gfn != sp->gfns[i]) {
+ if ((!pte_access && !shadow_present_mask) || gfn != sp->gfns[i]) {
drop_spte(vcpu->kvm, &sp->spt[i]);
flush = true;
continue;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c
index 75c9e87d446a..9ad60662beac 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c
@@ -101,6 +101,8 @@ bool make_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
u64 spte = SPTE_MMU_PRESENT_MASK;
bool wrprot = false;
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!pte_access && !shadow_present_mask);
+
if (sp->role.ad_disabled)
spte |= SPTE_TDP_AD_DISABLED_MASK;
else if (kvm_mmu_page_ad_need_write_protect(sp))
> +
> sptep = &sp->spt[i];
> spte = *sptep;
> host_writable = spte & shadow_host_writable_mask;
> --
> 2.36.0.rc2.479.g8af0fa9b8e-goog
>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-06 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-22 21:05 [PATCH v4 00/20] KVM: Extend Eager Page Splitting to the shadow MMU David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 01/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Optimize MMU page cache lookup for all direct SPs David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:46 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 02/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Use a bool for direct David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:46 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 03/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Derive shadow MMU page role from parent David Matlack
2022-05-05 21:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 22:10 ` David Matlack
2022-05-10 2:38 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-07 8:28 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-09 21:04 ` David Matlack
2022-05-10 2:58 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-10 13:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-12 16:10 ` David Matlack
2022-05-13 18:26 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 04/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Decompose kvm_mmu_get_page() into separate functions David Matlack
2022-05-05 21:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 05/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Consolidate shadow page allocation and initialization David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 20:53 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 06/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Rename shadow MMU functions that deal with shadow pages David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 07/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Move guest PT write-protection to account_shadowed() David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:18 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 08/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass memory caches to allocate SPs separately David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 09/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Replace vcpu with kvm in kvm_mmu_alloc_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 10/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass kvm pointer separately from vcpu to kvm_mmu_find_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 11/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow for NULL vcpu pointer in __kvm_mmu_get_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:26 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 22:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 23:59 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 12/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass const memslot to rmap_add() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 13/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Decouple rmap_add() and link_shadow_page() from kvm_vcpu David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:27 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 14/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Update page stats in __rmap_add() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Cache the access bits of shadowed translations David Matlack
2022-05-06 19:47 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-05-09 16:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:29 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 16/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend make_huge_page_split_spte() for the shadow MMU David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:31 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 17/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Zap collapsible SPTEs at all levels in " David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:34 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 18/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Refactor drop_large_spte() David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 19/20] KVM: Allow for different capacities in kvm_mmu_memory_cache structs David Matlack
2022-04-23 8:08 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-24 15:21 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 20/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend Eager Page Splitting to nested MMUs David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:51 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-09 21:40 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:44 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 22:47 ` Sean Christopherson
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=YnV7QUOkYVg+Ktnl@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pfeiner@google.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