From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
dominik.dingel@gmail.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 19/22] s390/mm: Split huge pages if granular protection is needed
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 08:00:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7493542-85d6-da62-1ab8-e683e1bf3f19@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e3030116-81cf-b419-97ab-8bd863317222@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2129 bytes --]
On 07.12.2017 17:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 06.11.2017 23:29, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> A guest can put DAT tables for a lower level guest in the same huge
>> segment as one of its prefixes. This would make it necessary for the
>> segment to be unprotected (because of the prefix) and protected
>> (because of the shadowing) at the same time. This is not possible in
>> this universe.
>>
>> Hence we split the affected huge segment, so we can protect on a
>> per-page basis. Such gmap segments are special and get a new software
>> bit, that helps us handling this edge case.
>
> I am thinking about another condition and am not sure yet if it is
> really a problem and already handled by this patch (if so, feel free to
> add it to the description :) ): G2 -> G3 page table and a contained G2
> -> G3 page lying on same G1 huge page
Valid objection, but we (hopefully :) ) got you covered.
We directly split on a pmd protection with the VSIE bit and then
re-drive protection on the pte:
if (((prot != PROT_WRITE) && (bits & GMAP_ENTRY_VSIE))) {
ret = gmap_pmd_split(gmap, gaddr, pmdp);
The red-rive is a bit ugly because of the EFAULT, but I'm open to
suggestions.
>
> G1 runs G2 with huge pages.
> G2 runs G3 without huge pages,
> G1 creates shadow page tables for G3.
>
> G2 has no idea of huge pages, so it could happen that a
> page table from G2 -> G3 falls into the same G1 huge page as a G2->G3
> backing page.
>
> Now, if we're unlucky, it can happen that this page table references
> that G3 page, lying on the same G1 huge page.
>
> G1 will create a shadow page table, protecting access to this huge page
> (do maintain the shadow properly).
>
> What will happen when G3 tries to write to this page:
>
> 1. Shadow page table in G1 is built, huge page is protected in g2 gmap.
> 2. Part of that huge page is to be used in the shadow page table with
> write access. This huge page is protected but we need write access, we
> need to fixup.
> 3. Fixing up will invalidate the shadow page table.
>
> IOW, G3 will never make progress.
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-08 7:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-06 22:29 [RFC/PATCH 00/22] KVM/s390: Hugetlbfs enablement Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 01/22] s390/mm: make gmap_protect_range more modular Janosch Frank
2017-11-08 10:40 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-08 12:21 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-08 12:26 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 02/22] s390/mm: Abstract gmap notify bit setting Janosch Frank
2017-11-10 12:57 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-13 15:57 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-15 9:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 03/22] s390/mm: add gmap PMD invalidation notification Janosch Frank
2017-11-15 9:55 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-17 9:02 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-17 9:19 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 04/22] s390/mm: Add gmap pmd invalidation and clearing Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 05/22] s390/mm: hugetlb pages within a gmap can not be freed Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 06/22] s390/mm: Introduce gmap_pmdp_xchg Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 07/22] RFC: s390/mm: Transfer guest pmd protection to host Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 08/22] s390/mm: Add huge page dirty sync support Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 09/22] s390/mm: clear huge page storage keys on enable_skey Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 10/22] s390/mm: Add huge pmd storage key handling Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 11/22] s390/mm: Remove superfluous parameter Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 12/22] s390/mm: Add gmap_protect_large read protection support Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 13/22] s390/mm: Make gmap_read_table EDAT1 compatible Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 14/22] s390/mm: Make protect_rmap " Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 15/22] s390/mm: GMAP read table extensions Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 16/22] s390/mm: Add shadow segment code Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 17/22] s390/mm: Add VSIE reverse fake case Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 18/22] s390/mm: Remove gmap_pte_op_walk Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 19/22] s390/mm: Split huge pages if granular protection is needed Janosch Frank
2017-12-07 16:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-08 7:00 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 20/22] s390/mm: Enable gmap huge pmd support Janosch Frank
2017-11-15 10:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-15 12:24 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 21/22] KVM: s390: Add KVM HPAGE capability Janosch Frank
2017-11-07 10:07 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-11-07 10:53 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-15 10:06 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-15 12:02 ` Janosch Frank
2017-11-06 22:30 ` [RFC/PATCH 22/22] RFC: s390/mm: Add gmap lock classes Janosch Frank
2017-11-15 10:10 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-11-15 12:16 ` Janosch Frank
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=c7493542-85d6-da62-1ab8-e683e1bf3f19@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dominik.dingel@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.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