[PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[Sukrit Bhatnagar]

On an EPT violation, bit 7 of the exit qualification is set if the
guest linear-address is valid. The derived page fault error code
should not be checked for this bit.

Fixes: f3009482512e ("KVM: VMX: Set PFERR_GUEST_{FINAL,PAGE}_MASK if and only if the GVA is valid")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251106052853.3071088-1-Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
(cherry picked from commit d0164c161923ac303bd843e04ebe95cfd03c6e19)
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
index 6c185a260c5b..d0387f543107 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
@@ -5810,7 +5810,7 @@ static int handle_ept_violation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_MASK)
 		      ? PFERR_PRESENT_MASK : 0;
 
-	if (error_code & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
+	if (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
 		error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_TRANSLATED) ?
 			      PFERR_GUEST_FINAL_MASK : PFERR_GUEST_PAGE_MASK;
 
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[Sean Christopherson]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2025, Sukrit Bhatnagar wrote:
> On an EPT violation, bit 7 of the exit qualification is set if the
> guest linear-address is valid. The derived page fault error code
> should not be checked for this bit.
> 
> Fixes: f3009482512e ("KVM: VMX: Set PFERR_GUEST_{FINAL,PAGE}_MASK if and only if the GVA is valid")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
> Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251106052853.3071088-1-Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> (cherry picked from commit d0164c161923ac303bd843e04ebe95cfd03c6e19)
> Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
> ---

No need for the manual "backport", commits that are tagged for stable@ are
automically pulled into LTS kernels so long as they apply cleanly (and obviously
don't cause problems).

RE: [PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[Sukrit.Bhatnagar]

On 2025-11-22 03:11, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> 
> No need for the manual "backport", commits that are tagged for stable@ are
> automically pulled into LTS kernels so long as they apply cleanly (and obviously
> don't cause problems).
 

This commit did not apply cleanly to the 6.12-stable tree,
as notified earlier by Greg's mail. 6.17-stable seemed to
have no issues.

The function handle_ept_violation got some changes in v6.16
  c8563d1b6998 ("KVM: VMX: Split out guts of EPT violation to common/exposed function")
which moved the code from vmx/vmx.c to vmx/common.h.
So, v6.16+ is ok, but not the earlier ones.

I think this manual backport commit is needed.
Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

--
Thanks
Sukrit

Re: [PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[Sean Christopherson]

On Sun, Nov 23, 2025, Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com wrote:
> On 2025-11-22 03:11, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > 
> > No need for the manual "backport", commits that are tagged for stable@ are
> > automically pulled into LTS kernels so long as they apply cleanly (and obviously
> > don't cause problems).
>  
> 
> This commit did not apply cleanly to the 6.12-stable tree,
> as notified earlier by Greg's mail. 6.17-stable seemed to
> have no issues.
> 
> The function handle_ept_violation got some changes in v6.16
>   c8563d1b6998 ("KVM: VMX: Split out guts of EPT violation to common/exposed function")
> which moved the code from vmx/vmx.c to vmx/common.h.
> So, v6.16+ is ok, but not the earlier ones.
> 
> I think this manual backport commit is needed.
> Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

Ah, your understanding is correct.  I saw that the commit was queue for 6.12 (and
landed in 6.12 as commit 3010739f53438) and assumed it was a clean backport.  But
I missed Sasha's Stable-dep-of magic intervention[2].

So this backport is _now_ unnecessary, but was necessary when you sent the patch.

Thanks for the backport and follow-up, much appreciated even though Sasha-bot
stole your thunder :-)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251121130150.019304053@linuxfoundation.org
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251120181940.1924069-1-sashal@kernel.org

FAILED: patch "[PATCH] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation" failed to apply to 6.12-stable tree

[gregkh]

The patch below does not apply to the 6.12-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.

To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:

git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-6.12.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x d0164c161923ac303bd843e04ebe95cfd03c6e19
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2025112016-chatter-plutonium-baf8@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.12.y' HEAD^..

Possible dependencies:



thanks,

greg k-h

------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------

From d0164c161923ac303bd843e04ebe95cfd03c6e19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 14:28:51 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

On an EPT violation, bit 7 of the exit qualification is set if the
guest linear-address is valid. The derived page fault error code
should not be checked for this bit.

Fixes: f3009482512e ("KVM: VMX: Set PFERR_GUEST_{FINAL,PAGE}_MASK if and only if the GVA is valid")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251106052853.3071088-1-Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/common.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/common.h
index bc5ece76533a..412d0829d7a2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/common.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/common.h
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static inline int __vmx_handle_ept_violation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t gpa,
 	error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK)
 		      ? PFERR_PRESENT_MASK : 0;
 
-	if (error_code & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
+	if (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
 		error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_TRANSLATED) ?
 			      PFERR_GUEST_FINAL_MASK : PFERR_GUEST_PAGE_MASK;
 

[PATCH 6.12.y] KVM: VMX: Fix check for valid GVA on an EPT violation

[Sukrit Bhatnagar]

On an EPT violation, bit 7 of the exit qualification is set if the
guest linear-address is valid. The derived page fault error code
should not be checked for this bit.

Fixes: f3009482512e ("KVM: VMX: Set PFERR_GUEST_{FINAL,PAGE}_MASK if and only if the GVA is valid")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251106052853.3071088-1-Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
(cherry picked from commit d0164c161923ac303bd843e04ebe95cfd03c6e19)
Signed-off-by: Sukrit Bhatnagar <Sukrit.Bhatnagar@sony.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
index 6c185a260c5b..d0387f543107 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
@@ -5810,7 +5810,7 @@ static int handle_ept_violation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_MASK)
 		      ? PFERR_PRESENT_MASK : 0;
 
-	if (error_code & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
+	if (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
 		error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_TRANSLATED) ?
 			      PFERR_GUEST_FINAL_MASK : PFERR_GUEST_PAGE_MASK;
 
-- 
2.43.0