Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>
To: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: maz@kernel.org, oupton@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com,
	seiden@linux.ibm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	yuzenghui@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>, Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Mitigate potential LPI registration failure
Date: Fri,  3 Jul 2026 14:26:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260703122601.2617577-4-clopez@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260703122601.2617577-2-clopez@suse.de>

Mitigate a potential failure when inserting a new LPI into the VGIC LPI
xarray.

When vgic_add_lpi() is preparing to register a new LPI, it pre-allocates
an xarray entry using xa_reserve_irq(), so that it can later perform the
insertion under the xarray lock without allocating.

However, since xa_reserve_irq() is called before acquiring such lock,
there is a potential race where xa_reserve_irq() observes a populated
entry, thus not performing the allocation, and another CPU removes that
entry before the xarray lock is grabbed to perform the insertion.

  CPU0 (Adding new LPI)                      CPU1 (Releasing LPI)
  =====================                      ===================
  vgic_add_lpi()
      /* Entry populated, does not allocate */
      xa_reserve_irq(.., intid, ..)
                                            vgic_release_deleted_lpis()
                                                xa_lock_irqsave()
                                                vgic_release_lpi_locked()
                          xarray node freed --> __xa_erase(.., intid)
                                                xa_unlock_irqrestore()
      xa_lock_irqsave()
      xa_load(.., intid) == NULL
      vgic_try_get_irq_ref(NULL) == false
      __xa_store(.., intid, irq, 0) <-- xarray node was freed, gfp=0
                                        cannot allocate, returns -ENOMEM

This can happen e.g. if the guest issues a DISCARD while the LPI is
still referenced from a vCPU's active-pending list (ap_list), and the
same INTID is re-mapped via MAPTI.

Mitigate this by passing GFP_NOWAIT to __xa_store(), so that the
allocation can happen under the lock in the rare case that this
condition is hit. Add __GFP_ACCOUNT as well to match xa_reserve_irq()'s
flags.

Reported-by: Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
Fixes: 1d6f83f60f79 ("KVM: arm64: vgic: Store LPIs in an xarray")
Signed-off-by: Carlos López <clopez@suse.de>
---
 arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
index 577286069368..327418477c51 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-its.c
@@ -121,7 +121,8 @@ static struct vgic_irq *vgic_add_lpi(struct kvm *kvm, u32 intid,
 		 * from the deferred release path, pending cleanup by
 		 * vgic_release_deleted_lpis(). Evict and free it if present.
 		 */
-		oldirq = __xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, irq, 0);
+		oldirq = __xa_store(&dist->lpi_xa, intid, irq,
+				    GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_ACCOUNT);
 		ret = xa_err(oldirq);
 		if (!ret && oldirq)
 			kfree_rcu(oldirq, rcu);
-- 
2.51.0



      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-07-03 12:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-03 12:25 [PATCH v4 0/2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix racy LPI release and re-registration handling Carlos López
2026-07-03 12:26 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix race between LPI release and re-registration Carlos López
2026-07-03 22:13   ` Oliver Upton
2026-07-03 22:19     ` Oliver Upton
2026-07-03 12:26 ` Carlos López [this message]

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=20260703122601.2617577-4-clopez@suse.de \
    --to=clopez@suse.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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