Re: [V3 10/11] KVM: selftests: Add ucall pool based implementation

Andrew Jones
2022-08-16T16:14:02Z

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 08:20:32AM -0700, Peter Gonda wrote:
> To add support for encrypted, SEV, guests in the ucall framework
> introduce a new "ucall pool" implementation. This was suggested in
> the thread on "[RFC PATCH 00/10] KVM: selftests: Add support for
> test-selectable ucall implementations". Using a listed as suggested

s/listed/list/

> there doesn't work well because the list is setup using HVAs not GVAs
> so use a bitmap + array solution instead to get the same pool of ucall
> structs result.
>
> This allows for guests with encryption enabled set up a pool of ucall

to set up

> structs in the guest's shared memory region.
>
> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
> ---
> .../selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h | 2 +
> .../selftests/kvm/include/ucall_common.h | 13 +--
> .../testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ucall.c | 10 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/riscv/ucall.c | 5 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/ucall.c | 5 +-
> .../testing/selftests/kvm/lib/ucall_common.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++-
> .../testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/ucall.c | 6 +-
> 7 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h
> index 1a84d2d1d85b..baede0d118c5 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util_base.h
> @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ struct kvm_vm {
> int stats_fd;
> struct kvm_stats_header stats_header;
> struct kvm_stats_desc *stats_desc;
> +
> + bool use_ucall_pool;
> };
>
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/ucall_common.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/ucall_common.h
> index 63bfc60be995..002a22e1cd1d 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/ucall_common.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/ucall_common.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ enum {
> struct ucall {
> uint64_t cmd;
> uint64_t args[UCALL_MAX_ARGS];
> +
> + /* For ucall pool usage. */
> + struct ucall *hva;
> };
>
> void ucall_arch_init(struct kvm_vm *vm, void *arg);
> @@ -32,15 +35,9 @@ void *ucall_arch_get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void ucall(uint64_t cmd, int nargs, ...);
> uint64_t get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct ucall *uc);
>
> -static inline void ucall_init(struct kvm_vm *vm, void *arg)
> -{
> - ucall_arch_init(vm, arg);
> -}
> +void ucall_init(struct kvm_vm *vm, void *arg);
>
> -static inline void ucall_uninit(struct kvm_vm *vm)
> -{
> - ucall_arch_uninit(vm);
> -}
> +void ucall_uninit(struct kvm_vm *vm);
>
> #define GUEST_SYNC_ARGS(stage, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4) \
> ucall(UCALL_SYNC, 6, "hello", stage, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ucall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ucall.c
> index 132c0e98bf49..ee70531e8e51 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ucall.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ucall.c
> @@ -81,12 +81,16 @@ void *ucall_arch_get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_MMIO &&
> run->mmio.phys_addr == (uint64_t)ucall_exit_mmio_addr) {
> - vm_vaddr_t gva;
> + uint64_t ucall_addr;

Why change this vm_vaddr_t to a uint64_t? We shouldn't, because...

>
> TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.is_write && run->mmio.len == 8,
> "Unexpected ucall exit mmio address access");
> - memcpy(&gva, run->mmio.data, sizeof(gva));
> - return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, gva);
> + memcpy(&ucall_addr, run->mmio.data, sizeof(ucall_addr));

...here we assume it's a vm_vaddr_t and only...

> +
> + if (vcpu->vm->use_ucall_pool)
> + return (void *)ucall_addr;

...here do we know otherwise. So only here should be any casting.

Also, I think here and in all the ucall_arch_get_ucall() functions we
should add a comment explaining a host-shared address is used, which
is why we don't need addr_gva2hva()

> + else
> + return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, ucall_addr);
> }
>
> return NULL;
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/riscv/ucall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/riscv/ucall.c
> index 37e091d4366e..4bb5616df29f 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/riscv/ucall.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/riscv/ucall.c
> @@ -59,7 +59,10 @@ void *ucall_arch_get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> run->riscv_sbi.extension_id == KVM_RISCV_SELFTESTS_SBI_EXT) {
> switch (run->riscv_sbi.function_id) {
> case KVM_RISCV_SELFTESTS_SBI_UCALL:
> - return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, run->riscv_sbi.args[0]);
> + if (vcpu->vm->use_ucall_pool)
> + return (void *)run->riscv_sbi.args[0];
> + else
> + return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, run->riscv_sbi.args[0]);

Using vm_vaddr_t gva variable for run->riscv_sbi.args[0] like aarch64 does
for it's address would look a bit nicer.

> case KVM_RISCV_SELFTESTS_SBI_UNEXP:
> vcpu_dump(stderr, vcpu, 2);
> TEST_ASSERT(0, "Unexpected trap taken by guest");
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/ucall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/ucall.c
> index 0f695a031d35..b24c6649877a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/ucall.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/s390x/ucall.c
> @@ -30,7 +30,10 @@ void *ucall_arch_get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> (run->s390_sieic.ipb >> 16) == 0x501) {
> int reg = run->s390_sieic.ipa & 0xf;
>
> - return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, run->s.regs.gprs[reg]);
> + if (vcpu->vm->use_ucall_pool)
> + return (void *)run->s.regs.gprs[reg];
> + else
> + return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, run->s.regs.gprs[reg]);

Same comment as for riscv.

> }
> return NULL;
> }
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/ucall_common.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/ucall_common.c
> index ced480860746..b6502a9420c4 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/ucall_common.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/ucall_common.c
> @@ -1,22 +1,122 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> #include "kvm_util.h"
> +#include "linux/types.h"
> +#include "linux/bitmap.h"
> +#include "linux/atomic.h"
> +
> +struct ucall_header {
> + DECLARE_BITMAP(in_use, KVM_MAX_VCPUS);
> + struct ucall ucalls[KVM_MAX_VCPUS];
> +};
> +
> +static bool use_ucall_pool;

I don't think we need this boolean. It will always be true when ucall_pool
is non-null and always false with ucall_pool is null. So we can just test
ucall_pool.

> +static struct ucall_header *ucall_pool;
> +
> +void ucall_init(struct kvm_vm *vm, void *arg)
> +{
> + struct ucall *uc;
> + struct ucall_header *hdr;
> + vm_vaddr_t vaddr;
> + int i;
> +
> + use_ucall_pool = vm->use_ucall_pool;
> + sync_global_to_guest(vm, use_ucall_pool);
> + if (!use_ucall_pool)
> + goto out;
> +
> + TEST_ASSERT(!ucall_pool, "Only a single encrypted guest at a time for ucalls.");

"Only a single VM may use a ucall pool at a time"

> + vaddr = vm_vaddr_alloc_shared(vm, sizeof(*hdr), vm->page_size);
> + hdr = (struct ucall_header *)addr_gva2hva(vm, vaddr);
> + memset(hdr, 0, sizeof(*hdr));
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; ++i) {
> + uc = &hdr->ucalls[i];
> + uc->hva = uc;
> + }
> +
> + ucall_pool = (struct ucall_header *)vaddr;
> + sync_global_to_guest(vm, ucall_pool);
> +
> +out:
> + ucall_arch_init(vm, arg);
> +}
> +
> +void ucall_uninit(struct kvm_vm *vm)
> +{
> + use_ucall_pool = false;
> + ucall_pool = NULL;
> +
> + if (!vm->memcrypt.encrypted) {

Why is this condition here?

> + sync_global_to_guest(vm, use_ucall_pool);
> + sync_global_to_guest(vm, ucall_pool);
> + }
> +
> + ucall_arch_uninit(vm);
> +}
> +
> +static struct ucall *ucall_alloc(void)
> +{
> + struct ucall *uc = NULL;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!use_ucall_pool)
> + goto out;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; ++i) {
> + if (!atomic_test_and_set_bit(i, ucall_pool->in_use)) {
> + uc = &ucall_pool->ucalls[i];
> + memset(uc->args, 0, sizeof(uc->args));

Do we need to zero uc? If so, what about uc->cmd?

> + break;
> + }
> + }

Need a blank line here

> +out:
> + return uc;
> +}
> +
> +static inline size_t uc_pool_idx(struct ucall *uc)
> +{
> + return uc->hva - ucall_pool->ucalls;
> +}
> +
> +static void ucall_free(struct ucall *uc)
> +{
> + if (!use_ucall_pool)
> + return;
> +
> + clear_bit(uc_pool_idx(uc), ucall_pool->in_use);
> +}
>
> void ucall(uint64_t cmd, int nargs, ...)
> {
> - struct ucall uc = {};
> + struct ucall *uc;
> + struct ucall tmp = {};
> va_list va;
> int i;
>
> - WRITE_ONCE(uc.cmd, cmd);
> + uc = ucall_alloc();
> + if (!uc)
> + uc = &tmp;
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(uc->cmd, cmd);
>
> nargs = min(nargs, UCALL_MAX_ARGS);
>
> va_start(va, nargs);
> for (i = 0; i < nargs; ++i)
> - WRITE_ONCE(uc.args[i], va_arg(va, uint64_t));
> + WRITE_ONCE(uc->args[i], va_arg(va, uint64_t));
> va_end(va);
>
> - ucall_arch_do_ucall((vm_vaddr_t)&uc);
> + /*
> + * When using the ucall pool implementation the @hva member of the ucall
> + * structs in the pool has been initialized to the hva of the ucall
> + * object.
> + */
> + if (use_ucall_pool)
> + ucall_arch_do_ucall((vm_vaddr_t)uc->hva);
> + else
> + ucall_arch_do_ucall((vm_vaddr_t)uc);
> +
> + ucall_free(uc);
> }
>
> uint64_t get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct ucall *uc)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/ucall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/ucall.c
> index ead9946399ab..07c1bc41fa5c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/ucall.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64/ucall.c
> @@ -30,7 +30,11 @@ void *ucall_arch_get_ucall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> struct kvm_regs regs;
>
> vcpu_regs_get(vcpu, &regs);
> - return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, regs.rdi);
> +
> + if (vcpu->vm->use_ucall_pool)
> + return (void *)regs.rdi;
> + else
> + return addr_gva2hva(vcpu->vm, regs.rdi);
> }
> return NULL;
> }
> --
> 2.37.1.559.g78731f0fdb-goog
>

Thanks,
drew