kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
	Richard Herbert <rherbert@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Use -1 to flag an undefined spte in get_mmio_spte()
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 09:05:03 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <X+DVv3/KjDn1+Iut@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tusjtrqp.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes:
> 
> > Return -1 from the get_walk() helpers if the shadow walk doesn't fill at
> > least one spte, which can theoretically happen if the walk hits a
> > not-present PTPDR.  Returning the root level in such a case will cause
> 
> PDPTR

Doh.

> > get_mmio_spte() to return garbage (uninitialized stack data).  In
> > practice, such a scenario should be impossible as KVM shouldn't get a
> > reserved-bit page fault with a not-present PDPTR.
> >
> > Note, using mmu->root_level in get_walk() is wrong for other reasons,
> > too, but that's now a moot point.
> >
> > Fixes: 95fb5b0258b7 ("kvm: x86/mmu: Support MMIO in the TDP MMU")
> > Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c     | 7 ++++++-
> >  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > index 7a6ae9e90bd7..a48cd12c01d7 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > @@ -3488,7 +3488,7 @@ static bool mmio_info_in_cache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 addr, bool direct)
> >  static int get_walk(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 addr, u64 *sptes)
> >  {
> >  	struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator iterator;
> > -	int leaf = vcpu->arch.mmu->root_level;
> > +	int leaf = -1;
> >  	u64 spte;
> >  
> >  
> > @@ -3532,6 +3532,11 @@ static bool get_mmio_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 addr, u64 *sptep)
> >  	else
> >  		leaf = get_walk(vcpu, addr, sptes);
> >  
> > +	if (unlikely(leaf < 0)) {
> > +		*sptep = 0ull;
> > +		return reserved;
> > +	}
> 
> When SPTE=0 is returned from get_mmio_spte(), handle_mmio_page_fault()
> will return RET_PF_RETRY -- should it be RET_PF_INVALID instead?

No, RET_PF_RETRY is the most appropriate.  A pae_root entry will only be zero if
the corresponding guest PDPTR is !PRESENT, i.e. the page fault is effectively in
the guest context.  The reason I say it should be an impossible condition is
because KVM should also reset the MMU whenever it snapshots the guest's PDPTRs,
i.e. it should be impossible to install a MMIO SPTE if the relevant PDPTR is
!PRESENT, and all MMIO SPTEs should be wiped out if the PDPTRs are reloaded.
I suppose by that argument, this should be a WARN_ON_ONCE, but I'm not sure if
I'm _that_ confident in my analysis :-)

Related side topic, this snippet in get_mmio_spte() is dead code, as the same
check is performed by its sole caller.  I'll send a patch to remove it (unless
Paolo wants a v2 of this series, in which case I'll tack it on the end).

	if (!VALID_PAGE(vcpu->arch.mmu->root_hpa)) {
		*sptep = 0ull;
		return reserved;
	}

  reply	other threads:[~2020-12-21 18:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-18  0:31 [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Bug fixes and cleanups in get_mmio_spte() Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  0:31 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Use -1 to flag an undefined spte " Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  8:58   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-12-21 17:05     ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2020-12-18  0:31 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Get root level from walkers when retrieving MMIO SPTE Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  9:10   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-12-21 18:24     ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-12-21 18:30       ` Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  0:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Use raw level to index into MMIO walks' sptes array Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  9:18   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-12-18  0:31 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Optimize not-present/MMIO SPTE check in get_mmio_spte() Sean Christopherson
2020-12-18  9:33   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
     [not found] ` <2346556.XAFRqVoOGU@starbug.dom>
2020-12-18  1:27   ` [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Bug fixes and cleanups " Richard Herbert
2020-12-21 18:26 ` Paolo Bonzini

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=X+DVv3/KjDn1+Iut@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=bgardon@google.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rherbert@sympatico.ca \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    --cc=wanpengli@tencent.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).