From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: arm64: Provide a PV_TIME device to user space
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 17:28:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c18f9d74-48eb-3e03-dca8-ad44e6d6b682@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1a7d5be6-184b-0c78-61a3-b01730cb5df9@arm.com>
On 05/08/2019 17:10, Steven Price wrote:
> On 03/08/2019 13:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:50:14 +0100
>> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Allow user space to inform the KVM host where in the physical memory
>>> map the paravirtualized time structures should be located.
>>>
>>> A device is created which provides the base address of an array of
>>> Stolen Time (ST) structures, one for each VCPU. There must be (64 *
>>> total number of VCPUs) bytes of memory available at this location.
>>>
>>> The address is given in terms of the physical address visible to
>>> the guest and must be 64 byte aligned. The memory should be marked as
>>> reserved to the guest to stop it allocating it for other purposes.
>>
>> Why? You seem to be allocating the memory from the kernel, so as far as
>> the guest is concerned, this isn't generally usable memory.
>
> I obviously didn't word it very well - that's what I meant. The "memory"
> that represents the stolen time structure shouldn't be shown to the
> guest as normal memory, but "reserved" for the purpose of stolen time.
>
> To be honest it looks like I forgot to rewrite this commit message -
> which 64 byte alignment is all that the guest can rely on (because each
> vCPU has it's own structure), the actual array of structures needs to be
> page aligned to ensure we can safely map it into the guest.
>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h | 2 +
>>> arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 6 +
>>> arch/arm64/kvm/Makefile | 1 +
>>> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 +
>>> virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 44 +++++++
>>> virt/kvm/arm/pvtime.c | 190 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 6 files changed, 245 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 virt/kvm/arm/pvtime.c
[...]
>>> +static int kvm_arm_pvtime_set_attr(struct kvm_device *dev,
>>> + struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kvm_arch_pvtime *pvtime = &dev->kvm->arch.pvtime;
>>> + u64 __user *user = (u64 __user *)attr->addr;
>>> + u64 paddr;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + switch (attr->group) {
>>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_PADDR:
>>> + if (get_user(paddr, user))
>>> + return -EFAULT;
>>> + if (paddr & 63)
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>
>> You should check whether the device fits into the IPA space for this
>> guest, and whether it overlaps with anything else.
>
> pvtime_map_pages() should fail in the case of overlap. That seems
> sufficient to me - do you think we need something stronger?
Definitely. stage2_set_pte() won't fail for a non-IO overlapping
mapping, and will just treat it as guest memory. If this overlaps with a
memslot, we'll never be able to fault that page in, ending up with
interesting memory corruption... :-/
That's one of the reasons why I think option (2) in your earlier email
is an interesting one, as it sidesteps a whole lot of ugly and hard to
test corner cases.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-05 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-02 14:50 [PATCH 0/9] arm64: Stolen time support Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 1/9] KVM: arm64: Document PV-time interface Steven Price
2019-08-03 11:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 13:06 ` Steven Price
2019-08-05 3:23 ` Zenghui Yu
2019-08-05 13:06 ` Steven Price
2019-08-05 16:40 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2019-08-07 13:21 ` Steven Price
2019-08-07 14:28 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2019-08-07 15:26 ` Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 2/9] KVM: arm/arm64: Factor out hypercall handling from PSCI code Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 3/9] KVM: arm64: Implement PV_FEATURES call Steven Price
2019-08-03 11:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 13:14 ` Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 4/9] KVM: arm64: Support stolen time reporting via shared structure Steven Price
2019-08-03 11:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 14:09 ` Steven Price
2019-08-03 17:58 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-03 18:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 14:18 ` Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 5/9] KVM: Allow kvm_device_ops to be const Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 6/9] KVM: arm64: Provide a PV_TIME device to user space Steven Price
2019-08-03 12:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-03 17:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-07 13:39 ` Steven Price
2019-08-07 13:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 16:10 ` Steven Price
2019-08-05 16:28 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 7/9] arm/arm64: Provide a wrapper for SMCCC 1.1 calls Steven Price
2019-08-05 10:03 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 8/9] arm/arm64: Make use of the SMCCC 1.1 wrapper Steven Price
2019-08-02 14:50 ` [PATCH 9/9] arm64: Retrieve stolen time as paravirtualized guest Steven Price
2019-08-04 9:53 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-08 15:29 ` Steven Price
2019-08-08 15:49 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-09 13:51 ` Zenghui Yu
2019-08-12 10:39 ` Steven Price
2019-08-13 6:06 ` Zenghui Yu
2019-08-03 18:05 ` [PATCH 0/9] arm64: Stolen time support Marc Zyngier
2019-08-05 13:06 ` Steven Price
2019-08-05 13:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-14 13:02 ` Alexander Graf
2019-08-14 14:19 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-08-14 14:52 ` [UNVERIFIED SENDER] " Alexander Graf
2019-08-16 10:23 ` Steven Price
2020-07-21 3:26 ` zhukeqian
2020-07-27 10:48 ` Steven Price
2020-07-29 2:57 ` zhukeqian
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=c18f9d74-48eb-3e03-dca8-ad44e6d6b682@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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).