Re: [PATCH 1/8] KVM: SVM: Fix nested nmi handling

[Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>]

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 03:46:07PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> On 22.04.2010, at 12:33, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> 
> > The patch introducing nested nmi handling had a bug. The
> > check does not belong to enable_nmi_window but must be in
> > nmi_allowed. This patch fixes this.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm.c |   16 +++++++++-------
> > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > index ab78eb8..ec20584 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > @@ -2771,8 +2771,12 @@ static int svm_nmi_allowed(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > {
> > 	struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
> > 	struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
> > -	return !(vmcb->control.int_state & SVM_INTERRUPT_SHADOW_MASK) &&
> > -		!(svm->vcpu.arch.hflags & HF_NMI_MASK);
> > +	int ret;
> > +	ret = !(vmcb->control.int_state & SVM_INTERRUPT_SHADOW_MASK) &&
> > +	      !(svm->vcpu.arch.hflags & HF_NMI_MASK);
> > +	ret = ret && gif_set(svm) && nested_svm_nmi(svm);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > }
> > 
> > static bool svm_get_nmi_mask(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > @@ -2841,11 +2845,9 @@ static void enable_nmi_window(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > 	 * Something prevents NMI from been injected. Single step over possible
> > 	 * problem (IRET or exception injection or interrupt shadow)
> > 	 */
> > -	if (gif_set(svm) && nested_svm_nmi(svm)) {
> > -		svm->nmi_singlestep = true;
> > -		svm->vmcb->save.rflags |= (X86_EFLAGS_TF | X86_EFLAGS_RF);
> > -		update_db_intercept(vcpu);
> > -	}
> > +	svm->nmi_singlestep = true;
> > +	svm->vmcb->save.rflags |= (X86_EFLAGS_TF | X86_EFLAGS_RF);
> > +	update_db_intercept(vcpu);
> 
> So we're always messing with the nested guest state when the host
> wants to inject an nmi into the l1 guest? Is that safe?

Why not? We can't inject an NMI directly into L2 if the nested
hypervisor intercepts it.

	Joerg