From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2613EE8015 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2023 16:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qedwb-00076v-1v; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 12:02:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qedw4-0006oS-4t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 12:02:20 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qedvy-0000j0-VR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 12:02:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1694188933; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=eU9nfCjWgy/hyYADmbiXusv8sTYK01XgzUGSvDa5ED4=; b=KYR5jo0fByFjpvmF/owZO73/SnszSz23dGPBwgzJ8zcmvNeCEbyBDM386JOY+YD3uM8b9Q W3yyLDBxFw/DUdsVQ5SsmS/EuGTHNPp+8SlN0Atk0mT0p0SEew03M6SXVZDvw8icOphK4M UoGLOLb3DuaeupVDzwCqmH387fGbWw0= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-561-MWsoFcAaNtyOWlkOszVTOA-1; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 12:02:12 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MWsoFcAaNtyOWlkOszVTOA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-3fe1521678fso16119885e9.1 for ; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 09:02:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1694188931; x=1694793731; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:subject:organization:from :references:cc:to:content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=eU9nfCjWgy/hyYADmbiXusv8sTYK01XgzUGSvDa5ED4=; b=XwOF/Y8Bp/AxcNlKg6MlCCxC5y7ximmtms+XNakMossZqG6weS8Q8x9Budg5+OMbHm OGtuctLHkls/aebMcWRYlcbpRYGzK+skefHVOkKLH/xpHPzHdh5LW3ht24gw7EP1G7SP 58SZVVGJ/Qlu2lRY5FIP3WOcjl8HujZ7NPLIGutTGE76RkoyeQu1CYTp1GhgkonIIjFQ CXBq0zbLkMaiBlJjsDMbJHXtGVPC7DnU98zU0NgSR1WrhO8BRIRX1feqn7AewHuYZ028 dY3o/+ZBaThR6SDAWXdoH3wh0J5cvbDBylha5ZaSrjS26K9hrnjgvB1K40sWvTPYA7MX um8g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyw1Vta7/NFrFOb7GXQzsDVBZ31Y32X0dQp2S87F0tTIduMGWWc X8x8ss36HH+vszJ4H2MSHkyyHgmbM0BCJHWecUnNsI26q+d4bN0IzsvGOhNXK+4gN0huv/uOrb9 pLNR9xMjwo/Nf3X4= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:ed0b:0:b0:3fb:b3aa:1c8a with SMTP id l11-20020a1ced0b000000b003fbb3aa1c8amr2573804wmh.16.1694188931096; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 09:02:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEoE20HHxyTOX2XDt44aSxNbBy+lzXtGBDG9ckdF5etMuXdG5lBqEWgHSwUZIKzTLV4qBAaKw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:ed0b:0:b0:3fb:b3aa:1c8a with SMTP id l11-20020a1ced0b000000b003fbb3aa1c8amr2573783wmh.16.1694188930641; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 09:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c720:d00:61ea:eace:637c:3f0f? (p200300cbc7200d0061eaeace637c3f0f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c720:d00:61ea:eace:637c:3f0f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h13-20020a05600c260d00b003fe4ca8decdsm5551472wma.31.2023.09.08.09.02.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Sep 2023 09:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6cbca7b9-381b-6268-27f0-d7ea1c5ed1bd@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 18:02:09 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Ani Sinha Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Marcel Apfelbaum , Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson , Eduardo Habkost , Igor Mammedov , Xiao Guangrong , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , Yanan Wang , qemu-devel References: <20230908095024.270946-1-anisinha@redhat.com> <77284898-c540-31ac-d438-ebff52f6d75d@redhat.com> <1911B17C-24F2-406B-9ED4-DCF98E794A09@redhat.com> <730648ed-55ac-aa2c-58d2-d79224aeb586@redhat.com> <1574DF3A-7E1F-4C4F-9087-6E8DEE456906@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat Subject: Re: [PATCH] mem/x86: add processor address space check for VM memory In-Reply-To: <1574DF3A-7E1F-4C4F-9087-6E8DEE456906@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=david@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.473, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On 08.09.23 17:13, Ani Sinha wrote: > > >> On 08-Sep-2023, at 7:46 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >> On 08.09.23 16:12, Ani Sinha wrote: >>>> On 08-Sep-2023, at 3:58 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>> >>>> On 08.09.23 11:50, Ani Sinha wrote: >>>>> Depending on the number of available address bits of the current processor, a >>>>> VM can only use a certain maximum amount of memory and no more. This change >>>>> makes sure that a VM is not configured to have more memory than what it can use >>>>> with the current processor settings when started. Additionally, the change adds >>>>> checks during memory hotplug to ensure that the VM does not end up getting more >>>>> memory than what it can actually use after hotplug. >>>>> Currently, both the above checks are only for pc (x86) platform. >>>>> Buglink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1235403 >>>>> CC: imammedo@redhat.com >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha >>>>> --- >>>>> hw/i386/pc.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> hw/mem/memory-device.c | 6 ++++++ >>>>> include/hw/boards.h | 9 +++++++++ >>>>> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+) >>>>> diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c >>>>> index 54838c0c41..f84e4c4916 100644 >>>>> --- a/hw/i386/pc.c >>>>> +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c >>>>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ >>>>> #include "hw/i386/topology.h" >>>>> #include "hw/i386/fw_cfg.h" >>>>> #include "hw/i386/vmport.h" >>>>> +#include "hw/mem/memory-device.h" >>>>> #include "sysemu/cpus.h" >>>>> #include "hw/block/fdc.h" >>>>> #include "hw/ide/internal.h" >>>>> @@ -1006,6 +1007,17 @@ void pc_memory_init(PCMachineState *pcms, >>>>> exit(EXIT_FAILURE); >>>>> } >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * check if the VM started with more ram configured than max physical >>>>> + * address available with the current processor. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + if (machine->ram_size > maxphysaddr + 1) { >>>>> + error_report("Address space limit 0x%"PRIx64" < 0x%"PRIx64 >>>>> + " (max configured memory), phys-bits too low (%u)", >>>>> + maxphysaddr, machine->ram_size, cpu->phys_bits); >>>>> + exit(EXIT_FAILURE); >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> ... I know that this used to be a problem in the past, but nowadays we already do have similar checks in place? >>>> >>>> $ ./build/qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4T -machine q35,memory-backend=mem0 -object memory-backend-ram,id=mem0,size=4T,reserve=off >>>> qemu-system-x86_64: Address space limit 0xffffffffff < 0x5077fffffff phys-bits too low (40) >>> So you are saying that this is OK and should be allowed? On a 32 bit processor that can access only 4G memory, I am spinning up a 10G VM. >> >> Would that 32bit process have PAE (Physical Address Extension) and still be able to access that memory? > > > You are sidestepping my point. Sure, we can improve the condition check by checking for PAE CPUID etc but that is not the issue I am trying too point out. What if the processor did not have PAE? Would we allow a VM to have memory size which the processor can’t access? There is no such check today it would seem. > Indeed, because the implementation for 32bit in pc_max_used_gpa() is wrong. Note that for 64bit it does the right thing, even with memory hotplug, because the PCI64 hole is placed above the memory device region. So I think we should tackle that via pc_max_used_gpa(). diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c index 54838c0c41..d187890675 100644 --- a/hw/i386/pc.c +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c @@ -908,9 +908,12 @@ static hwaddr pc_max_used_gpa(PCMachineState *pcms, uint64_t pci_hole64_size) { X86CPU *cpu = X86_CPU(first_cpu); - /* 32-bit systems don't have hole64 thus return max CPU address */ - if (cpu->phys_bits <= 32) { - return ((hwaddr)1 << cpu->phys_bits) - 1; + /* + * 32-bit systems don't have hole64, but we might have a region for + * memory hotplug. + */ + if (!(cpu->env.features[FEAT_8000_0001_EDX] & CPUID_EXT2_LM)) { + return pc_pci_hole64_start() - 1; } return pc_pci_hole64_start() + pci_hole64_size - 1; That implies: ./build/qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu pentium -m size=4G -nodefaults -nographic qemu-system-x86_64: Address space limit 0xffffffff < 0x13fffffff phys-bits too low (32) As we have memory over 4G (due to PCI hole), that would now correctly fail. However, what works is: ./build/qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu pentium -m size=3G -nodefaults -nographic Weirdly enough, when setting cpu->phys_bits, we take care of PSE36 and allow for 36bits in the address space. So what works: ./build/qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu pentium,pse36=on -m size=32G -nodefaults -nographic And what doesn't: ./build/qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu pentium,pse36=on -m size=64G -nodefaults -nographic -S qemu-system-x86_64: Address space limit 0xfffffffff < 0x103fffffff phys-bits too low (36) However, we don't seem to have such handling in place for PAE (do we have to extend that handling in x86_cpu_realizefn()?). Maybe pae should always imply pse36, not sure ... -- Cheers, David / dhildenb