linux-coco.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kas@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
	 Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
	Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	 Hou Wenlong <houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 3/4] KVM: x86: Leave user-return notifier registered on reboot/shutdown
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 12:15:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251030191528.3380553-4-seanjc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251030191528.3380553-1-seanjc@google.com>

Leave KVM's user-return notifier registered in the unlikely case that the
notifier is registered when disabling virtualization via IPI callback in
response to reboot/shutdown.  On reboot/shutdown, keeping the notifier
registered is ok as far as MSR state is concerned (arguably better then
restoring MSRs at an unknown point in time), as the callback will run
cleanly and restore host MSRs if the CPU manages to return to userspace
before the system goes down.

The only wrinkle is that if kvm.ko module unload manages to race with
reboot/shutdown, then leaving the notifier registered could lead to
use-after-free due to calling into unloaded kvm.ko module code.  But such
a race is only possible on --forced reboot/shutdown, because otherwise
userspace tasks would be frozen before kvm_shutdown() is called, i.e. on a
"normal" reboot/shutdown, it should be impossible for the CPU to return to
userspace after kvm_shutdown().

Furthermore, on a --forced reboot/shutdown, unregistering the user-return
hook from IRQ context doesn't fully guard against use-after-free, because
KVM could immediately re-register the hook, e.g. if the IRQ arrives before
kvm_user_return_register_notifier() is called.

Rather than trying to guard against the IPI in the "normal" user-return
code, which is difficult and noisy, simply leave the user-return notifier
registered on a reboot, and bump the kvm.ko module refcount to defend
against a use-after-free due to kvm.ko unload racing against reboot.

Alternatively, KVM could allow kvm.ko and try to drop the notifiers during
kvm_x86_exit(), but that's also a can of worms as registration is per-CPU,
and so KVM would need to blast an IPI, and doing so while a reboot/shutdown
is in-progress is far risky than preventing userspace from unloading KVM.

Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index bb7a7515f280..c927326344b1 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -13086,7 +13086,21 @@ int kvm_arch_enable_virtualization_cpu(void)
 void kvm_arch_disable_virtualization_cpu(void)
 {
 	kvm_x86_call(disable_virtualization_cpu)();
-	drop_user_return_notifiers();
+
+	/*
+	 * Leave the user-return notifiers as-is when disabling virtualization
+	 * for reboot, i.e. when disabling via IPI function call, and instead
+	 * pin kvm.ko (if it's a module) to defend against use-after-free (in
+	 * the *very* unlikely scenario module unload is racing with reboot).
+	 * On a forced reboot, tasks aren't frozen before shutdown, and so KVM
+	 * could be actively modifying user-return MSR state when the IPI to
+	 * disable virtualization arrives.  Handle the extreme edge case here
+	 * instead of trying to account for it in the normal flows.
+	 */
+	if (in_task() || WARN_ON_ONCE(!kvm_rebooting))
+		drop_user_return_notifiers();
+	else
+		__module_get(THIS_MODULE);
 }
 
 bool kvm_vcpu_is_reset_bsp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
-- 
2.51.1.930.gacf6e81ea2-goog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-10-30 19:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-30 19:15 [PATCH v5 0/4] KVM: x86: User-return MSR fix+cleanups Sean Christopherson
2025-10-30 19:15 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] KVM: TDX: Explicitly set user-return MSRs that *may* be clobbered by the TDX-Module Sean Christopherson
2025-11-03  6:20   ` Yan Zhao
2025-11-04  7:06     ` Yan Zhao
2025-11-04  8:40       ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-04  9:31         ` Yan Zhao
2025-11-04 17:55           ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-05  1:52             ` Yan Zhao
2025-11-05  9:16               ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-06  2:22                 ` Yan Zhao
2025-11-03  7:42   ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-10-30 19:15 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] KVM: x86: WARN if user-return MSR notifier is registered on exit Sean Christopherson
2025-10-30 19:15 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-11-07  8:18   ` [PATCH v5 3/4] KVM: x86: Leave user-return notifier registered on reboot/shutdown Chao Gao
2025-11-08  1:37     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-30 19:15 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] KVM: x86: Don't disable IRQs when unregistering user-return notifier Sean Christopherson
2025-11-04 10:34   ` Huang, Kai
2025-11-10 15:37 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] KVM: x86: User-return MSR fix+cleanups 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=20251030191528.3380553-4-seanjc@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com \
    --cc=kas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    --cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).