From: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Tag disallowed NX huge pages even if they're not tracked
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:49:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yt8eC2OyolG9QE3g@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220723012325.1715714-2-seanjc@google.com>
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 01:23:20AM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Tag shadow pages that cannot be replaced with an NX huge page even if
> zapping the page would not allow KVM to create a huge page, e.g. because
> something else prevents creating a huge page.
This sentence looks messed up :). Should it read:
Tag shadow pages that cannot be replaced with an NX huge page, e.g.
because something else prevents creating a huge page.
?
> This will allow a future
> patch to more precisely apply the mitigation by checking if an existing
> shadow page can be replaced by a NX huge page. Currently, KVM assumes
> that any existing shadow page encountered cannot be replaced by a NX huge
> page (if the mitigation is enabled), which prevents KVM from replacing
> no-longer-necessary shadow pages with huge pages, e.g. after disabling
> dirty logging, zapping from the mmu_notifier due to page migration,
> etc...
>
> Failure to tag shadow pages appropriately could theoretically lead to
> false negatives, e.g. if a fetch fault requests a small page and thus
> isn't tracked, and a read/write fault later requests a huge page, KVM
> will not reject the huge page as it should.
>
> To avoid yet another flag, initialize the list_head and use list_empty()
> to determine whether or not a page is on the list of NX huge pages that
> should be recovered.
>
> Opportunstically rename most of the variables/functions involved to
> provide consistency, e.g. lpage vs huge page and NX huge vs huge NX, and
> clarity, e.g. to make it obvious the flag applies only to the NX huge
> page mitigation, not to any condition that prevents creating a huge page.
>
> Fixes: 5bcaf3e1715f ("KVM: x86/mmu: Account NX huge page disallowed iff huge page was requested")
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 6 +--
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h | 22 ++++++++--
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h | 6 +--
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 8 ++--
> 5 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index e8281d64a431..246b69262b93 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1143,7 +1143,7 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> struct hlist_head mmu_page_hash[KVM_NUM_MMU_PAGES];
> struct list_head active_mmu_pages;
> struct list_head zapped_obsolete_pages;
> - struct list_head lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages;
> + struct list_head possible_nx_huge_pages;
> struct kvm_page_track_notifier_node mmu_sp_tracker;
> struct kvm_page_track_notifier_head track_notifier_head;
> /*
> @@ -1304,8 +1304,8 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> * - tdp_mmu_roots (above)
> * - tdp_mmu_pages (above)
> * - the link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used by the TDP MMU
> - * - lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages
> - * - the lpage_disallowed_link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used
> + * - possible_nx_huge_pages;
> + * - the possible_nx_huge_page_link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used
> * by the TDP MMU
> * It is acceptable, but not necessary, to acquire this lock when
> * the thread holds the MMU lock in write mode.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index 8e477333a263..1112e3a4cf3e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> @@ -802,15 +802,43 @@ static void account_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_address(kvm, gfn, 1);
> }
>
> -void account_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +static void untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm,
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> {
> - if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> + if (list_empty(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link))
> + return;
> +
> + --kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> + list_del_init(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +}
> +
> +void unaccount_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +{
> + sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed = false;
> +
> + untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
> +}
> +
> +static void track_possible_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm,
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +{
> + if (!list_empty(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link))
> return;
>
> ++kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> - list_add_tail(&sp->lpage_disallowed_link,
> - &kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages);
> - sp->lpage_disallowed = true;
> + list_add_tail(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link,
> + &kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages);
> +}
> +
> +void account_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> + bool nx_huge_page_possible)
> +{
> + sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed = true;
> +
> + if (!nx_huge_page_possible)
> + untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
What would be a scenario where calling untrack_possible_nx_huge_page()
is actually necessary here?
> + else
> + track_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
> }
>
> static void unaccount_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> @@ -830,13 +858,6 @@ static void unaccount_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> kvm_mmu_gfn_allow_lpage(slot, gfn);
> }
>
> -void unaccount_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> -{
> - --kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> - sp->lpage_disallowed = false;
> - list_del(&sp->lpage_disallowed_link);
> -}
> -
> static struct kvm_memory_slot *
> gfn_to_memslot_dirty_bitmap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
> bool no_dirty_log)
> @@ -2115,6 +2136,8 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *kvm_mmu_alloc_shadow_page(struct kvm *kvm,
>
> set_page_private(virt_to_page(sp->spt), (unsigned long)sp);
>
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +
> /*
> * active_mmu_pages must be a FIFO list, as kvm_zap_obsolete_pages()
> * depends on valid pages being added to the head of the list. See
> @@ -2472,8 +2495,8 @@ static bool __kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(struct kvm *kvm,
> zapped_root = !is_obsolete_sp(kvm, sp);
> }
>
> - if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> - unaccount_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> + if (sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed)
> + unaccount_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
>
> sp->role.invalid = 1;
>
> @@ -3112,9 +3135,9 @@ static int __direct_map(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault)
> continue;
>
> link_shadow_page(vcpu, it.sptep, sp);
> - if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed &&
> - fault->req_level >= it.level)
> - account_huge_nx_page(vcpu->kvm, sp);
> + if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed)
> + account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp,
> + fault->req_level >= it.level);
> }
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(it.level != fault->goal_level))
> @@ -5970,7 +5993,7 @@ int kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
>
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.active_mmu_pages);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.zapped_obsolete_pages);
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages);
> spin_lock_init(&kvm->arch.mmu_unsync_pages_lock);
>
> r = kvm_mmu_init_tdp_mmu(kvm);
> @@ -6845,23 +6868,25 @@ static void kvm_recover_nx_lpages(struct kvm *kvm)
Can you rename this to kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages() while you're here?
> ratio = READ_ONCE(nx_huge_pages_recovery_ratio);
> to_zap = ratio ? DIV_ROUND_UP(nx_lpage_splits, ratio) : 0;
> for ( ; to_zap; --to_zap) {
> - if (list_empty(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages))
> + if (list_empty(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages))
> break;
>
> /*
> * We use a separate list instead of just using active_mmu_pages
> - * because the number of lpage_disallowed pages is expected to
> - * be relatively small compared to the total.
> + * because the number of shadow pages that be replaced with an
> + * NX huge page is expected to be relatively small compared to
> + * the total number of shadow pages. And because the TDP MMU
> + * doesn't use active_mmu_pages.
> */
> - sp = list_first_entry(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages,
> + sp = list_first_entry(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages,
> struct kvm_mmu_page,
> - lpage_disallowed_link);
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!sp->lpage_disallowed);
> + possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed);
> if (is_tdp_mmu_page(sp)) {
> flush |= kvm_tdp_mmu_zap_sp(kvm, sp);
> } else {
> kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(kvm, sp, &invalid_list);
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->lpage_disallowed);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed);
> }
>
> if (need_resched() || rwlock_needbreak(&kvm->mmu_lock)) {
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> index 582def531d4d..ff4ca54b9dda 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> @@ -57,7 +57,13 @@ struct kvm_mmu_page {
> bool tdp_mmu_page;
> bool unsync;
> u8 mmu_valid_gen;
> - bool lpage_disallowed; /* Can't be replaced by an equiv large page */
> +
> + /*
> + * The shadow page can't be replaced by an equivalent huge page
> + * because it is being used to map an executable page in the guest
> + * and the NX huge page mitigation is enabled.
> + */
> + bool nx_huge_page_disallowed;
>
> /*
> * The following two entries are used to key the shadow page in the
> @@ -100,7 +106,14 @@ struct kvm_mmu_page {
> };
> };
>
> - struct list_head lpage_disallowed_link;
> + /*
> + * Use to track shadow pages that, if zapped, would allow KVM to create
> + * an NX huge page. A shadow page will have nx_huge_page_disallowed
> + * set but not be on the list if a huge page is disallowed for other
> + * reasons, e.g. because KVM is shadowing a PTE at the same gfn, the
> + * memslot isn't properly aligned, etc...
> + */
> + struct list_head possible_nx_huge_page_link;
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> /*
> * Used out of the mmu-lock to avoid reading spte values while an
> @@ -315,7 +328,8 @@ void disallowed_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_page_fault *fault, u64 spte, int cur_
>
> void *mmu_memory_cache_alloc(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *mc);
>
> -void account_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
> -void unaccount_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
> +void account_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> + bool nx_huge_page_possible);
> +void unaccount_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
>
> #endif /* __KVM_X86_MMU_INTERNAL_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> index f5958071220c..259c0f019f09 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> @@ -713,9 +713,9 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault,
> continue;
>
> link_shadow_page(vcpu, it.sptep, sp);
> - if (fault->huge_page_disallowed &&
> - fault->req_level >= it.level)
> - account_huge_nx_page(vcpu->kvm, sp);
> + if (fault->huge_page_disallowed)
> + account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp,
> + fault->req_level >= it.level);
> }
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(it.level != fault->goal_level))
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> index 40ccb5fba870..a30983947fee 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,8 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *tdp_mmu_alloc_sp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> static void tdp_mmu_init_sp(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, tdp_ptep_t sptep,
> gfn_t gfn, union kvm_mmu_page_role role)
> {
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +
> set_page_private(virt_to_page(sp->spt), (unsigned long)sp);
>
> sp->role = role;
> @@ -390,8 +392,8 @@ static void tdp_mmu_unlink_sp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> lockdep_assert_held_write(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>
> list_del(&sp->link);
> - if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> - unaccount_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> + if (sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed)
> + unaccount_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
>
> if (shared)
> spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> @@ -1134,7 +1136,7 @@ static int tdp_mmu_link_sp(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter,
> spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> list_add(&sp->link, &kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages);
> if (account_nx)
> - account_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> + account_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp, true);
account_nx is fault->huge_page_disallowed && fault->req_level >=
iter.level. So this is equivalent to:
if (fault->huge_page_disallowed && fault->req_level >= iter.level)
account_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp, true);
Whereas __direct_map() uses:
if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed)
account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp, fault->req_level >= it.level);
Aside from is_tdp (which you cover in another patch), why is there a
discrepancy in the NX Huge Page accounting?
> spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.37.1.359.gd136c6c3e2-goog
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-25 22:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-23 1:23 [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: x86: Apply NX mitigation more precisely Sean Christopherson
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Tag disallowed NX huge pages even if they're not tracked Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 22:49 ` David Matlack [this message]
2022-07-25 23:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:45 ` David Matlack
2022-07-26 0:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-28 22:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Properly account NX huge page workaround for nonpaging MMUs Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:05 ` David Matlack
2022-07-25 23:08 ` David Matlack
2022-07-28 20:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Set disallowed_nx_huge_page in TDP MMU before setting SPTE Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:16 ` David Matlack
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Track the number of TDP MMU pages, but not the actual pages Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:21 ` David Matlack
2022-07-25 23:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-27 2:41 ` Yan Zhao
2022-07-27 19:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-29 1:02 ` Yan Zhao
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Add helper to convert SPTE value to its shadow page Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:23 ` David Matlack
2022-07-25 23:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-23 1:23 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] KVM: x86/mmu: explicitly check nx_hugepage in disallowed_hugepage_adjust() Sean Christopherson
2022-07-25 23:28 ` David Matlack
2022-07-26 5:37 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: x86: Apply NX mitigation more precisely Mingwei Zhang
2022-07-26 16:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-26 17:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-28 20:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-07-28 21:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-28 21:41 ` Mingwei Zhang
2022-07-28 22:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-07-28 22:15 ` Sean Christopherson
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=Yt8eC2OyolG9QE3g@google.com \
--to=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mizhang@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.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