From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/xen: Add KVM_XEN_VCPU_ATTR_TYPE_WRITE_HYPERCALL_PAGE
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2026 14:58:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f45b6d2310bb650438ffa67adf66f5be16736df2.camel@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aj6BSMT2LOd4JRpu@google.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3985 bytes --]
On Fri, 2026-06-26 at 06:40 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2026, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Thu, 2026-06-25 at 16:09 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
> > > > index 91fd3673c09a..c16b4560c9e7 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/xen.c
> > > > @@ -907,6 +907,13 @@ int kvm_xen_vcpu_set_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_xen_vcpu_attr *data)
> > > > {
> > > > int idx, r = -ENOENT;
> > > >
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * kvm_xen_write_hypercall_page() manages its own locking.
> > > > + * Handle it before taking xen_lock to avoid a deadlock.
> > >
> > > Do we actually want the side effects that necessitate taking xen.xen_lock? From
> > > a uAPI perspective, it's odd to effectively bundle KVM_XEN_ATTR_TYPE_LONG_MODE
> > > into KVM_XEN_VCPU_ATTR_TYPE_WRITE_HYPERCALL_PAGE.
> >
> > That's *guest* ABI, and it's derived from Xen behaviour. Xen will
> > 'latch' its idea of whether a guest VM is 32-bit or 64-bit, for the
> > purpose of shared data structures (shared_info page, vcpu_info,
> > runstate).
> >
> > Xen latches this from the current mode of the running vCPU in *two*
> > places:
> > • When the hypercall MSR is invoked
> > • When the guest sets the event channel GSI (HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ).
> >
> > Thus far, the former has been handled in the kernel (in the code you're
> > looking at), while the latter is why we have the ioctl to explicitly
> > latch the guest's long_mode from userspace too, as userspace handles
> > the HVMOP_set_param calls.
>
> Right, and I'm pointing out that from a KVM uAPI perspective, bundling the first
> one in a "write hypercall page" call is rather odd, especially since there's
> already uAPI to handle the latching.
Mostly just because they came in the opposite order. The kernel was
writing the hypercall page for itself for about a decade before there
was anything to latch. And userspace wasn't *involved* when it happened
(initially because there was no facility for userspace intercepting MSR
writes).
> > > The other question is, why does kvm_xen_write_hypercall_page() drop xen_lock
> > > when writing guest memory? That seems odd and unnecessary.
> >
> > Huh? It takes the lock to do the thing that needs the lock, then drops
> > it. That is not "odd and unnecessary" at all.
> >
> > You've been spending too long with these scope-guarded locks.
>
> No, I'm asking why KVM doesn't serialize the writes to guest memory. Usually
> when KVM writes to guest memory, KVM is emulating something that is very much
> vCPU-specific, and so if there are races it's the guest's problem to deal with.
>
> The Xen MSR here is clearly VM-scoped though, which is why it feels odd to take
> a per-VM lock, and then deliberately drop the lock before completing the operation,
> In practice it shouldn't matter, since it sounds like the same repeating 16 byte
> pattern will be written every time, but it was a bit head-scratching when reading
> the code.
The lock protects the long_mode latching. It wouldn't make sense to
hold it around the actual writing of the hypercall page. It's not
intended to be an *atomic* write, and holding some random lock around
it wouldn't make it atomic with respect to all the other things that
can write guest memory anyway.
> We can/should return whatever kvm_vcpu_write_guest() returns, i.e. literally
> return its result directly. Which of course is only ever going to be -EFAULT,
> but in the extremely unlikely case that ever changes, we won't have to worry
> about creating misleading behavior in the Xen code.
Yes, and if we do it with a wrapper as you suggested, we can return a
proper error code and the MSR handler can convert that to 0/1.
As it is, we were doing the conversion the other way round, which is
why we were making up error numbers for the failure cause.
[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5069 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-27 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-28 19:12 [PATCH] KVM: x86/xen: Add KVM_XEN_VCPU_ATTR_TYPE_WRITE_HYPERCALL_PAGE David Woodhouse
2026-04-29 10:36 ` Paul Durrant
2026-06-02 17:01 ` David Woodhouse
2026-06-25 23:09 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-06-26 7:45 ` David Woodhouse
2026-06-26 13:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-06-27 13:58 ` David Woodhouse [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=f45b6d2310bb650438ffa67adf66f5be16736df2.camel@infradead.org \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@xen.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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