All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Hide guest counter updates from the VMRUN instruction
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 14:23:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZG6AUjci2J9WpT2z@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230310105346.12302-6-likexu@tencent.com>

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023, Like Xu wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index adb92fc4d7c9..d6fcbf233cb3 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -561,6 +561,10 @@ struct kvm_pmu {
>  	 */
>  	u64 host_cross_mapped_mask;
>  
> +	/* Flags to track any HW quirks that need to be fixed by vPMU. */
> +	u64 quirk_flags;
> +	DECLARE_BITMAP(hide_vmrun_pmc_idx, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX);

Since it sounds like AMD isn't changing the behavior, let's forego the quirk and
just hardcode the fixup.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> index 2a0504732966..315dca021d57 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> @@ -254,6 +254,7 @@ static void pmc_pause_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
>  	counter += perf_event_pause(pmc->perf_event, true);
>  	pmc->counter = counter & pmc_bitmask(pmc);
>  	pmc->is_paused = true;
> +	kvm_mark_pmc_is_quirky(pmc);
>  }
>  
>  static bool pmc_resume_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
> @@ -822,6 +823,19 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pmu_event_filter(struct kvm *kvm, void __user *argp)
>  	return r;
>  }
>  
> +static inline bool event_is_branch_instruction(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)

How about pmc_is_counting_branches()?  The "event" itself isn't a branch
instruction.

> +{
> +	return eventsel_match_perf_hw_id(pmc, PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS) ||
> +		eventsel_match_perf_hw_id(pmc,
> +					  PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS);

Let this poke out.

> +}
> +
> +static inline bool quirky_pmc_will_count_vmrun(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
> +{
> +	return event_is_branch_instruction(pmc) && event_is_allowed(pmc) &&
> +		!static_call(kvm_x86_get_cpl)(pmc->vcpu);
> +}
> +
>  void kvm_pmu_handle_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
>  	struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
> @@ -837,6 +851,10 @@ void kvm_pmu_handle_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  		reprogram_counter(pmc);
>  		kvm_pmu_handle_pmc_overflow(pmc);
> +
> +		if (vcpu_has_pmu_quirks(vcpu) &&
> +		    quirky_pmc_will_count_vmrun(pmc))
> +			set_bit(pmc->idx, pmu->hide_vmrun_pmc_idx);

Doesn't this need to adjust the count _before_ handling overflow?  I.e. isn't it
possible for the bogus counts to cause bogus overflow?

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
> index a47b579667c6..30f6f58f4c38 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
> @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@
>  #define VMWARE_BACKDOOR_PMC_REAL_TIME		0x10001
>  #define VMWARE_BACKDOOR_PMC_APPARENT_TIME	0x10002
>  
> +#define X86_PMU_COUNT_VMRUN	BIT_ULL(0)
> +#define X86_PMU_QUIRKS_MASK	X86_PMU_COUNT_VMRUN
> +
>  struct kvm_pmu_ops {
>  	bool (*hw_event_available)(struct kvm_pmc *pmc);
>  	bool (*pmc_is_enabled)(struct kvm_pmc *pmc);
> @@ -54,14 +57,33 @@ static inline void kvm_pmu_request_counter_reprogram(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
>  	kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_PMU, pmc->vcpu);
>  }
>  
> +static inline bool vcpu_has_pmu_quirks(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> +	return vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu)->quirk_flags & X86_PMU_QUIRKS_MASK;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * The time to mark pmc is when the accumulation value returned
> + * by perf API based on a HW counter has just taken effect.
> + */
> +static inline void kvm_mark_pmc_is_quirky(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
> +{
> +	if (!vcpu_has_pmu_quirks(pmc->vcpu))
> +		return;
> +
> +	kvm_pmu_request_counter_reprogram(pmc);
> +}
> +
>  static inline u64 pmc_read_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
>  {
>  	u64 counter, enabled, running;
>  
>  	counter = pmc->counter;
> -	if (pmc->perf_event && !pmc->is_paused)
> +	if (pmc->perf_event && !pmc->is_paused) {
>  		counter += perf_event_read_value(pmc->perf_event,
>  						 &enabled, &running);
> +		kvm_mark_pmc_is_quirky(pmc);
> +	}
>  	/* FIXME: Scaling needed? */
>  	return counter & pmc_bitmask(pmc);
>  }
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c
> index 5fa939e411d8..130991a97f22 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c
> @@ -187,6 +187,7 @@ static void amd_pmu_refresh(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	pmu->nr_arch_fixed_counters = 0;
>  	pmu->global_status = 0;
>  	bitmap_set(pmu->all_valid_pmc_idx, 0, pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters);
> +	pmu->quirk_flags |= X86_PMU_COUNT_VMRUN;
>  }
>  
>  static void amd_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> index f41d96e638ef..f6b33d172481 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> @@ -3919,6 +3919,31 @@ static fastpath_t svm_exit_handlers_fastpath(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	return EXIT_FASTPATH_NONE;
>  }
>  
> +static void pmu_hide_vmrun(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

This needs to be noinstr.

> +{
> +	struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
> +	struct kvm_pmc *pmc;
> +	unsigned int i;
> +
> +	for_each_set_bit(i, pmu->hide_vmrun_pmc_idx, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX) {
> +		clear_bit(i, pmu->hide_vmrun_pmc_idx);

Clearing the bit will hide only the first VMRUN after the guest attempts to read
the counter, no?  The fixup needs to apply to every VMRUN that is executed after
the PMC is programmed.  Or am I misreading the patch?

> +
> +		/* AMD doesn't have fixed counters at now. */
> +		if (i >= pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * The prerequisite for fixing HW quirks is that there is indeed
> +		 * HW working and perf has no chance to retrieve the counter.

I don't follow the "perf has no chance to retrieve the counter" part.

> +		 */
> +		pmc = &pmu->gp_counters[i];
> +		if (!pmc->perf_event || pmc->perf_event->hw.idx < 0)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		pmc->counter--;
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static noinstr void svm_vcpu_enter_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool spec_ctrl_intercepted)
>  {
>  	struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
> @@ -3986,6 +4011,9 @@ static __no_kcsan fastpath_t svm_vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  	kvm_wait_lapic_expire(vcpu);
>  
> +	if (vcpu->kvm->arch.enable_pmu && vcpu_has_pmu_quirks(vcpu))
> +		pmu_hide_vmrun(vcpu);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * If this vCPU has touched SPEC_CTRL, restore the guest's value if
>  	 * it's non-zero. Since vmentry is serialising on affected CPUs, there
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-05-24 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-10 10:53 [PATCH 0/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Hide guest counter updates from the VMRUN instruction Like Xu
2023-03-10 10:53 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Emulate CTR overflow directly in kvm_pmu_handle_event() Like Xu
2023-03-10 10:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Add a helper to check if pmc has PEBS mode enabled Like Xu
2023-05-24 20:54   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-10 10:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Move the overflow of a normal counter out of PMI context Like Xu
2023-05-24 21:03   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-10 10:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Reorder functions to reduce unnecessary declarations Like Xu
2023-05-24 21:14   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-10 10:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: x86/pmu: Hide guest counter updates from the VMRUN instruction Like Xu
2023-04-07  2:18   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-07  8:15     ` Like Xu
2023-04-07 14:56       ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-19 13:41         ` Like Xu
2023-04-26  5:25           ` Sandipan Das
2023-04-26  6:25             ` Like Xu
2023-05-24 20:41             ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-24 20:47               ` Jim Mattson
2023-05-24 21:29                 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-24 21:32                   ` Jim Mattson
2023-05-29 14:51                     ` Like Xu
2023-05-30 20:00                       ` Jim Mattson
2023-05-24 21:23   ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2023-05-24 21:30     ` Jim Mattson
2023-05-29 14:36       ` Like Xu
2023-03-13 10:57 ` [PATCH 0/5] " Sandipan Das
2023-03-23  8:16   ` Like Xu

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=ZG6AUjci2J9WpT2z@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=like.xu.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.