From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/6] KVM: X86: Alloc pae_root shadow page
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 16:45:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YdXLNEwCY8cqV7KS@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJhGHyAOyR6yGdyxsKydt_+HboGjxc-psbbSCqsrBo4WgUgQsQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 05, 2022, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 5:54 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > default_pae_pdpte is needed because the cpu expect PAE pdptes are
> > > present when VMenter.
> >
> > That's incorrect. Neither Intel nor AMD require PDPTEs to be present. Not present
> > is perfectly ok, present with reserved bits is what's not allowed.
> >
> > Intel SDM:
> > A VM entry that checks the validity of the PDPTEs uses the same checks that are
> > used when CR3 is loaded with MOV to CR3 when PAE paging is in use[7]. If MOV to CR3
> > would cause a general-protection exception due to the PDPTEs that would be loaded
> > (e.g., because a reserved bit is set), the VM entry fails.
> >
> > 7. This implies that (1) bits 11:9 in each PDPTE are ignored; and (2) if bit 0
> > (present) is clear in one of the PDPTEs, bits 63:1 of that PDPTE are ignored.
>
> But in practice, the VM entry fails if the present bit is not set in the
> PDPTE for the linear address being accessed (when EPT enabled at least). The
> host kvm complains and dumps the vmcs state.
That doesn't make any sense. If EPT is enabled, KVM should never use a pae_root.
The vmcs.GUEST_PDPTRn fields are in play, but those shouldn't derive from KVM's
shadow page tables.
And I doubt there is a VMX ucode bug at play, as KVM currently uses '0' in its
shadow page tables for not-present PDPTEs.
If you can post/provide the patches that lead to VM-Fail, I'd be happy to help
debug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-05 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-10 9:25 [RFC PATCH 0/6] KVM: X86: Add and use shadow page with level promoted or acting as pae_root Lai Jiangshan
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] KVM: X86: Check root_level only in fast_pgd_switch() Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 20:24 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] KVM: X86: Walk shadow page starting with shadow_root_level Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 20:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-01-04 20:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-01-04 20:43 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] KVM: X86: Add arguement gfn and role to kvm_mmu_alloc_page() Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 20:53 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] KVM: X86: Introduce role.level_promoted Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 22:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-02-11 16:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] KVM: X86: Alloc pae_root shadow page Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 21:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-01-05 3:11 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-05 16:45 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-01-06 2:01 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-06 19:41 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-01-07 4:36 ` Lai Jiangshan
2021-12-10 9:25 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] KVM: X86: Use level_promoted and pae_root shadow page for 32bit guests Lai Jiangshan
2022-01-04 20:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-12-10 10:27 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] KVM: X86: Add and use shadow page with level promoted or acting as pae_root Maxim Levitsky
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=YdXLNEwCY8cqV7KS@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=laijs@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).