From: andre.przywara@arm.com (Andre Przywara)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: arm/arm64: Properly protect VGIC locks from IRQs
Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 15:20:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180511142015.21953-2-andre.przywara@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180511142015.21953-1-andre.przywara@arm.com>
As Jan reported [1], lockdep complains about the VGIC not being bullet
proof. This seems to be due to two issues:
- When commit 006df0f34930 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support calling
vgic_update_irq_pending from irq context") promoted irq_lock and
ap_list_lock to _irqsave, we forgot two instances of irq_lock.
lockdeps seems to pick those up.
- If a lock is _irqsave, any other locks we take inside them should be
_irqsafe as well. So the lpi_list_lock needs to be promoted also.
This fixes both issues by simply making the remaining instances of those
locks _irqsave.
One irq_lock is addressed in a separate patch, to simplify backporting.
Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 006df0f34930 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support calling vgic_update_irq_pending from irq context")
Reported-by: Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@caviumnetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
[1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2018-May/575718.html
---
virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c | 5 +++--
virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 10 ++++++----
virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c | 22 ++++++++++++++--------
3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c
index 10b38178cff2..4ffc0b5e6105 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-debug.c
@@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ static int vgic_debug_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v)
struct vgic_state_iter *iter = (struct vgic_state_iter *)v;
struct vgic_irq *irq;
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = NULL;
+ unsigned long flags;
if (iter->dist_id == 0) {
print_dist_state(s, &kvm->arch.vgic);
@@ -227,9 +228,9 @@ static int vgic_debug_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v)
irq = &kvm->arch.vgic.spis[iter->intid - VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS];
}
- spin_lock(&irq->irq_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
print_irq_state(s, irq, vcpu);
- spin_unlock(&irq->irq_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
return 0;
}
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
index a8f07243aa9f..41abf92f2699 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c
@@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid,
{
struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(kvm, NULL, intid), *oldirq;
+ unsigned long flags;
int ret;
/* In this case there is no put, since we keep the reference. */
@@ -71,7 +72,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid,
irq->intid = intid;
irq->target_vcpu = vcpu;
- spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
/*
* There could be a race with another vgic_add_lpi(), so we need to
@@ -99,7 +100,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid,
dist->lpi_list_count++;
out_unlock:
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
/*
* We "cache" the configuration table entries in our struct vgic_irq's.
@@ -315,6 +316,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 **intid_ptr)
{
struct vgic_dist *dist = &vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic;
struct vgic_irq *irq;
+ unsigned long flags;
u32 *intids;
int irq_count, i = 0;
@@ -330,7 +332,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 **intid_ptr)
if (!intids)
return -ENOMEM;
- spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry(irq, &dist->lpi_list_head, lpi_list) {
if (i == irq_count)
break;
@@ -339,7 +341,7 @@ static int vgic_copy_lpi_list(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 **intid_ptr)
continue;
intids[i++] = irq->intid;
}
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
*intid_ptr = intids;
return i;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
index 27219313a406..1dfb5b2f1b12 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic.c
@@ -43,9 +43,13 @@ struct vgic_global kvm_vgic_global_state __ro_after_init = {
* kvm->lock (mutex)
* its->cmd_lock (mutex)
* its->its_lock (mutex)
- * vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock
- * kvm->lpi_list_lock
- * vgic_irq->irq_lock
+ * vgic_cpu->ap_list_lock must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ * kvm->lpi_list_lock must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ * vgic_irq->irq_lock must be taken with IRQs disabled
+ *
+ * As the ap_list_lock might be taken from the timer interrupt handler,
+ * we have to disable IRQs before taking this lock and everything lower
+ * than it.
*
* If you need to take multiple locks, always take the upper lock first,
* then the lower ones, e.g. first take the its_lock, then the irq_lock.
@@ -72,8 +76,9 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_get_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid)
{
struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
struct vgic_irq *irq = NULL;
+ unsigned long flags;
- spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry(irq, &dist->lpi_list_head, lpi_list) {
if (irq->intid != intid)
@@ -89,7 +94,7 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_get_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid)
irq = NULL;
out_unlock:
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
return irq;
}
@@ -134,19 +139,20 @@ static void vgic_irq_release(struct kref *ref)
void vgic_put_irq(struct kvm *kvm, struct vgic_irq *irq)
{
struct vgic_dist *dist = &kvm->arch.vgic;
+ unsigned long flags;
if (irq->intid < VGIC_MIN_LPI)
return;
- spin_lock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
if (!kref_put(&irq->refcount, vgic_irq_release)) {
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
return;
};
list_del(&irq->lpi_list);
dist->lpi_list_count--;
- spin_unlock(&dist->lpi_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dist->lpi_list_lock, flags);
kfree(irq);
}
--
2.14.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-11 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-11 14:20 [PATCH 0/4] KVM: arm/arm64: Fix locking issues Andre Przywara
2018-05-11 14:20 ` Andre Przywara [this message]
2018-05-11 14:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC/ITS: Promote irq_lock() in update_affinity Andre Przywara
2018-05-11 14:20 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC/ITS: protect kvm_read_guest() calls with SRCU lock Andre Przywara
2018-05-11 14:20 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC/ITS save/restore: protect kvm_read_guest() calls Andre Przywara
2018-05-15 10:26 ` [PATCH 0/4] KVM: arm/arm64: Fix locking issues Christoffer Dall
2018-05-15 11:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-05-15 11:54 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-05-15 12:05 ` 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=20180511142015.21953-2-andre.przywara@arm.com \
--to=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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