From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 09/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Move the verifying of NPT's PDPTE in FNAME(fetch)
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 23:21:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ytc8fZL2WU4u2x6j@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220521131700.3661-10-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
On Sat, May 21, 2022, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>
>
> FNAME(page_fault) verifies PDPTE for nested NPT in PAE paging mode
> because nested_svm_get_tdp_pdptr() reads the guest NPT's PDPTE from
> memory unconditionally for each call.
>
> The verifying is complicated and it works only when mmu->pae_root
> is always used when the guest is PAE paging.
Why is this relevant? It's not _that_ complicated, and even if it were, I don't
see how calling that out helps the reader understand the motivation for this patch.
> Move the verifying code in FNAME(fetch) and simplify it since the local
> shadow page is used and it can be walked in FNAME(fetch) and unlinked
> from children via drop_spte().
>
> It also allows for mmu->pae_root NOT to be used when it is NOT required
Avoid leading with pronous, "it" is ambiguous, e.g. at first I thought "it' meant
moving the code, but what "it" really means is using the iterator from the shadow
page walk instead of hardcoding a pae_root lookup.
And changing from pae_root to it.sptep needs to be explicitly called out. It's
a subtle but important detail. And if you call that out, then it's more obvious
why this patch is relevant to not having to use pae_root for a 64-bit host with NPT.
> to be put in a 32bit CR3.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> index cd6032e1947c..67c419bce1e5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> @@ -659,6 +659,39 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault,
> clear_sp_write_flooding_count(it.sptep);
> drop_large_spte(vcpu, it.sptep);
>
> + /*
> + * When nested NPT enabled and L1 is PAE paging,
> + * mmu->get_pdptrs() which is nested_svm_get_tdp_pdptr() reads
> + * the guest NPT's PDPTE from memory unconditionally for each
> + * call.
> + *
> + * The guest PAE root page is not write-protected.
> + *
> + * The mmu->get_pdptrs() in FNAME(walk_addr_generic) might get
> + * a value different from previous calls or different from the
> + * return value of mmu->get_pdptrs() in mmu_alloc_shadow_roots().
> + *
> + * It will cause the following code installs the spte in a wrong
> + * sp or links a sp to a wrong parent if the return value of
> + * mmu->get_pdptrs() is not verified unchanged since
> + * FNAME(gpte_changed) can't check this kind of change.
> + *
> + * Verify the return value of mmu->get_pdptrs() (only the gfn
> + * in it needs to be checked) and drop the spte if the gfn isn't
> + * matched.
> + *
> + * Do the verifying unconditionally when the guest is PAE
> + * paging no matter whether it is nested NPT or not to avoid
> + * complicated code.
> + */
> + if (vcpu->arch.mmu->cpu_role.base.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL &&
> + it.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL &&
> + is_shadow_present_pte(*it.sptep)) {
> + sp = to_shadow_page(*it.sptep & PT64_BASE_ADDR_MASK);
For this patch, it's probably worth a
WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->spt != vcpu->arch.mmu->pae_root);
Mostly so that when the future patch stops using pae_root for 64-bit NPT hosts,
there's a code change for this particular logic that is very much relevant to
that change.
> + if (gw->table_gfn[it.level - 2] != sp->gfn)
> + drop_spte(vcpu->kvm, it.sptep);
> + }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-19 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-21 13:16 [PATCH V3 00/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Use one-off local shadow page for special roots Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 01/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Verify PDPTE for nested NPT in PAE paging mode when page fault Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 21:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 02/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Add using_local_root_page() Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-26 21:28 ` David Matlack
2022-05-26 21:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-19 22:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 03/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Reduce a check in using_local_root_page() for common cases Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 04/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Add local shadow pages Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-26 21:38 ` David Matlack
2022-05-26 22:01 ` David Matlack
2022-07-20 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 05/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Link PAE root pagetable with its children Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 22:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 06/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Activate local shadow pages and remove old logic Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 07/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Remove the check of the return value of to_shadow_page() Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 22:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 08/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Allocate mmu->pae_root for PAE paging on-demand Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 23:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-20 0:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 09/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Move the verifying of NPT's PDPTE in FNAME(fetch) Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 23:21 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 10/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Remove unused INVALID_PAE_ROOT and IS_VALID_PAE_ROOT Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 23:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:16 ` [PATCH V3 11/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Don't use mmu->pae_root when shadowing PAE NPT in 64-bit host Lai Jiangshan
2022-07-19 23:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-07-19 23:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-21 13:17 ` [PATCH V3 12/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Remove mmu_alloc_special_roots() Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-26 8:49 ` [PATCH V3 00/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Use one-off local shadow page for special roots Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-26 20:27 ` David Matlack
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=Ytc8fZL2WU4u2x6j@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.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).