From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f177.google.com (mail-pg1-f177.google.com [209.85.215.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 562FB2C87 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 19:06:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f177.google.com with SMTP id n23so97207pgh.8 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:06:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Ldj1ddyxFxyQn1P+7U21zE8sjEfcNWeGvgdcMjeN8ow=; b=GpXuydJMaY5WU3GNXnra8fb0QxJ21K1yg/2Yfr+9y9SdyTweeX/PFEXrDKILHAxhHt p6K5FRUHJXAGqi5tOfGlbq3rqnFQCU2R2JiBWlJZtHgQeo8lZksJS8JLuVaKUFln8+UQ QB5PdKrNUElX3lot09fgygBgsJvl3WiOqXY3AzxtQyOGbuiadFHr5lhNGeSbw5ZHhmLs H0LM4w/AkVBucc8LLr9ItQ1HNz4qJIAUROHDyt2qdPFHUZa7n3x55AsaTmHdFJI1KCih uKoXNahx5vdoJcc6I7BJ01DbFRWPY4qTxQsVCnXeB2j8/VlGXuCaFN6C5fzY4NSdp0Ir g0aw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Ldj1ddyxFxyQn1P+7U21zE8sjEfcNWeGvgdcMjeN8ow=; b=LubOV9mcJvJIhHHLHnuNo8uY3CxhZPZ5BL63OFumJwJnwPcGpku2Dit36t5cTUAXQC Xq+EYhWku6EgDbixx9otdJ/mPEuCgR/GgYsFa3QUAaoF495MIF6U1oYNpimibhIVwdeB eu/nWw5ZYrMrXiYuo5q7O4VfCgQbK3KnFSeSKJcLm2lANgh0pbn3VsOcFICBZsdUgDIB ua5XGcSeFyQYYZmqn36YQJN1pb9ZEldbLJtnro1AgIZBq+zF5fedSeJikw8O+w9CueAw Z7OR5MDyika9RBVWBVBbG6GZxmllqLghdkoWs7GMLl2DegaxU0QuvCsUDpVH7YItj/JG 6StA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5300hXa2H1t4PQOjRY9uwWFjJ2aiFErDJj4uCMKbFJ67R9by8cRW sQyhqxJqdf7V3bhJl5yZttLhuQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJze0lQCEEqIKDMf/2e7SXLtpJ3is5kITQ6qUJHlSXMzFeN48xOz6hwg/+xzSFZScLJ2N/rB6g== X-Received: by 2002:a63:8aca:: with SMTP id y193mr1486059pgd.362.1635534399609; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:06:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (157.214.185.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.185.214.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m22sm7408458pfo.71.2021.10.29.12.06.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:06:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 19:06:35 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Cc: Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , kvm@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ajay Garg , Paolo Bonzini , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Shove vp_bitmap handling down into sparse_set_to_vcpu_mask() Message-ID: References: <20211028213408.2883933-1-seanjc@google.com> <87pmrokn16.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Oct 29, 2021, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > > + /* If vp_index == vcpu_idx for all vCPUs, fill vcpu_mask directly. */ > > > + if (likely(!has_mismatch)) > > > + bitmap = (u64 *)vcpu_mask; > > > + > > > + memset(bitmap, 0, sizeof(vp_bitmap)); > > > > ... but in the unlikely case has_mismatch == true 'bitmap' is still > > uninitialized here, right? How doesn't it crash? > > I'm sure it does crash. I'll hack the guest to actually test this. Crash confirmed. But I don't feel too bad about my one-line goof because the existing code botches sparse VP_SET, i.e. _EX flows. The spec requires the guest to explicit specify the number of QWORDS in the variable header[*], e.g. VP_SET in this case, but KVM ignores that and does a harebrained calculation to "count" the number of sparse banks. It does this by counting the number of bits set in valid_bank_mask, which is comically broken because (a) the whole "sparse" thing should be a clue that they banks are not packed together, (b) the spec clearly states that "bank = VPindex / 64", (c) the sparse_bank madness makes this waaaay more complicated than it needs to be, and (d) the massive sparse_bank allocation on the stack is completely unnecessary because KVM simply ignores everything that wouldn't fit in vp_bitmap. To reproduce, stuff vp_index in descending order starting from KVM_MAX_VCPUS - 1. hv_vcpu->vp_index = KVM_MAX_VCPUS - vcpu->vcpu_idx - 1; E.g. with an 8 vCPU guest, KVM will calculate sparse_banks_len=1, read zeros, and do nothing, hanging the guest because it never sends IPIs. So v2 will be completely different because the "fix" for the KASAN issue is to get rid of sparse_banks entirely. [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-windows/tlfs/hypercall-interface#variable-sized-hypercall-input-headers [2] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-windows/tlfs/datatypes/hv_vp_set#sparse-virtual-processor-set