From: Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Remove the pending state of a discarded LPI
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 02:49:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <as3-wkYnyOxu-Xlh@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <sashiko-outbox-169278@kernel.org>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 08:50:51AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] kvm: arm64: vgic-its: TOCTOU race resurrects discarded LPI due to IPI skip
> - [High] kvm: arm64: vgic-its: Race on vcpu->arch.pause breaks mutual exclusion
> - [Medium] kvm: arm64: vgic-its: Global VM halt on DISCARD causes Denial of Service
> --
>
> commit 4bb7971d12d2fa6f1083c9f2ddc383b8d63483fb
> Author: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>
> KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Remove the pending state of a discarded LPI
>
> This commit ensures the pending state of a queued LPI is cleared when handling
> an ITS DISCARD command. It halts the guest before clearing the pending state if
> the LPI is queued on a running vCPU.
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
> > @@ -829,12 +829,26 @@ static int vgic_its_cmd_handle_discard(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_its *its,
> > struct its_device *device = find_its_device(its, device_id);
> > int ite_esz = vgic_its_get_abi(its)->ite_esz;
> > gpa_t gpa = device->itt_addr + ite->event_id * ite_esz;
> > + struct vgic_irq *irq = ite->irq;
> > + bool queued;
> > +
> > + vgic_its_invalidate_cache(its);
> > +
> > /*
> > - * Though the spec talks about removing the pending state, we
> > - * don't bother here since we clear the ITTE anyway and the
> > - * pending state is a property of the ITTE struct.
> > + * A queued LPI can be pending in a running vCPU's list register,
> > + * which the exit path folds back: halt the guest before clearing.
> > */
> > - vgic_its_invalidate_cache(its);
> > + scoped_guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave, &irq->irq_lock)
> > + queued = irq->vcpu;
> > +
> > + if (queued)
> > + kvm_arm_halt_guest(kvm);
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does this introduce a denial of service if a guest spams DISCARD commands?
>
> Because kvm_arm_halt_guest() forces all vCPUs in the VM to exit, a guest
> rapidly issuing DISCARD commands for a single vCPU's LPI could repeatedly
> lock up the entire VM and cause host starvation. Could we restrict the
> synchronization strictly to the target irq->vcpu where the LPI is queued?
A guest has chosen to shoot itself in the foot, why should we care? The
whole point of pausing the VM is to flush state and block the vCPU
threads...
> > +
> > + scoped_guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave, &irq->irq_lock)
> > + irq->pending_latch = false;
>
> [Severity: High]
> Is there a window here where an exiting vCPU might overwrite the cleared
> latch and resurrect the LPI?
>
> If the target vCPU is just exiting when kvm_arm_halt_guest() broadcasts
> KVM_REQ_SLEEP, the vCPU sets vcpu->mode = OUTSIDE_GUEST_MODE before folding
> its hardware state in kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run().
>
> Because kvm_request_needs_ipi() checks:
>
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:kvm_request_needs_ipi() {
> if (req & KVM_REQUEST_WAIT)
> return mode != OUTSIDE_GUEST_MODE;
> }
>
> The IPI is skipped and kvm_arm_halt_guest() returns immediately without
> waiting for the vCPU to sync. The DISCARD thread then clears
> irq->pending_latch = false.
>
> Concurrently, the exiting vCPU executes kvm_vgic_sync_hwstate(), reads the
> still-pending state from the hardware LR, and unconditionally overwrites the
> cleared latch back to true:
>
> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c:vgic_v3_fold_lr() {
> if (irq->config == VGIC_CONFIG_EDGE && (val & ICH_LR_PENDING_BIT))
> irq->pending_latch = true;
> }
>
> Could we coordinate with the vCPU's state folding sequence to ensure the
> discard isn't lost?
https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20260929093548.3598547-1-maz@kernel.org/
> > +
> > + if (queued)
> > + kvm_arm_resume_guest(kvm);
>
> [Severity: High]
> Can concurrent DISCARD commands on different ITS instances break the mutual
> exclusion of vcpu->arch.pause?
>
> vgic_its_cmd_handle_discard() executes holding the per-ITS its->its_lock.
> If a VM has multiple ITS devices, two DISCARD commands could run concurrently
> and both call kvm_arm_halt_guest(), which sets vcpu->arch.pause to true
> across all vCPUs.
>
> The first thread to finish will call kvm_arm_resume_guest(), which does:
>
> arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c:kvm_arm_resume_guest() {
> kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> vcpu->arch.pause = false;
> __kvm_vcpu_wake_up(vcpu);
> }
> }
>
> This unconditionally clears the pause flag and wakes up all vCPUs while the
> second thread is still modifying VGIC state assuming the guest is fully
> halted.
>
https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20260929093548.3598547-1-maz@kernel.org/
Thanks,
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-13 9:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-13 8:16 [PATCH v2 0/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Fix LPI double mapping and DISCARD Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 8:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Don't map an LPI from more than one event Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 8:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Remove the pending state of a discarded LPI Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 8:50 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-13 9:49 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2026-10-16 15:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-10-17 7:40 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-17 7:47 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 9:51 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Fix LPI double mapping and DISCARD Oliver Upton
2026-10-13 10:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-10-13 10:50 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 11:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-10-13 12:59 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-13 13:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-10-13 14:33 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-14 13:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-10-14 15:20 ` Fuad Tabba
2026-10-26 12:00 ` Marc Zyngier
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=as3-wkYnyOxu-Xlh@kernel.org \
--to=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=fuad.tabba@linux.dev \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--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