| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110706180859.GB9820@amt.cnet>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 15:08:59 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 16/19] KVM: MMU: lockless walking shadow page table
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 04:26:31PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Use rcu to protect shadow pages table to be freed, so we can safely walk it,
> it should run fastly and is needed by mmio page fault
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 8 +++
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 42e577d..87a868e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -233,6 +233,12 @@ struct kvm_mmu_page {
> unsigned int unsync_children;
> unsigned long parent_ptes; /* Reverse mapping for parent_pte */
> DECLARE_BITMAP(unsync_child_bitmap, 512);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> + int clear_spte_count;
> +#endif
> +
> + struct rcu_head rcu;
> };
>
> struct kvm_pv_mmu_op_buffer {
> @@ -477,6 +483,8 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> u64 hv_guest_os_id;
> u64 hv_hypercall;
>
> + atomic_t reader_counter;
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_MMU_AUDIT
> int audit_point;
> #endif
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> index 06c3a4a..cf02f0e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -182,6 +182,12 @@ struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator {
> shadow_walk_okay(&(_walker)); \
> shadow_walk_next(&(_walker)))
>
> +#define for_each_shadow_entry_lockless(_vcpu, _addr, _walker, spte) \
> + for (shadow_walk_init(&(_walker), _vcpu, _addr); \
> + shadow_walk_okay(&(_walker)) && \
> + ({ spte = mmu_spte_get_lockless(_walker.sptep); 1; }); \
> + __shadow_walk_next(&(_walker), spte))
> +
> static struct kmem_cache *pte_list_desc_cache;
> static struct kmem_cache *mmu_page_header_cache;
> static struct percpu_counter kvm_total_used_mmu_pages;
> @@ -274,6 +280,11 @@ static u64 __update_clear_spte_slow(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> {
> return xchg(sptep, spte);
> }
> +
> +static u64 __get_spte_lockless(u64 *sptep)
> +{
> + return ACCESS_ONCE(*sptep);
> +}
> #else
> union split_spte {
> struct {
> @@ -283,6 +294,18 @@ union split_spte {
> u64 spte;
> };
>
> +static void count_spte_clear(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> +{
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp = page_header(__pa(sptep));
> +
> + if (is_shadow_present_pte(spte))
> + return;
> +
> + /* Ensure the spte is completely set before we increase the count */
> + smp_wmb();
> + sp->clear_spte_count++;
> +}
> +
> static void __set_spte(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> {
> union split_spte *ssptep, sspte;
> @@ -318,6 +341,7 @@ static void __update_clear_spte_fast(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> smp_wmb();
>
> ssptep->spte_high = sspte.spte_high;
> + count_spte_clear(sptep, spte);
> }
>
> static u64 __update_clear_spte_slow(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> @@ -330,9 +354,40 @@ static u64 __update_clear_spte_slow(u64 *sptep, u64 spte)
> /* xchg acts as a barrier before the setting of the high bits */
> orig.spte_low = xchg(&ssptep->spte_low, sspte.spte_low);
> orig.spte_high = ssptep->spte_high = sspte.spte_high;
> + count_spte_clear(sptep, spte);
>
> return orig.spte;
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * The idea using the light way get the spte on x86_32 guest is from
> + * gup_get_pte(arch/x86/mm/gup.c).
> + * The difference is we can not catch the spte tlb flush if we leave
> + * guest mode, so we emulate it by increase clear_spte_count when spte
> + * is cleared.
> + */
> +static u64 __get_spte_lockless(u64 *sptep)
> +{
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp = page_header(__pa(sptep));
> + union split_spte spte, *orig = (union split_spte *)sptep;
> + int count;
> +
> +retry:
> + count = sp->clear_spte_count;
> + smp_rmb();
> +
> + spte.spte_low = orig->spte_low;
> + smp_rmb();
> +
> + spte.spte_high = orig->spte_high;
> + smp_rmb();
> +
> + if (unlikely(spte.spte_low != orig->spte_low ||
> + count != sp->clear_spte_count))
> + goto retry;
> +
> + return spte.spte;
> +}
> #endif
>
> static bool spte_is_bit_cleared(u64 old_spte, u64 new_spte, u64 bit_mask)
> @@ -438,6 +493,28 @@ static void mmu_spte_clear_no_track(u64 *sptep)
> __update_clear_spte_fast(sptep, 0ull);
> }
>
> +static u64 mmu_spte_get_lockless(u64 *sptep)
> +{
> + return __get_spte_lockless(sptep);
> +}
> +
> +static void walk_shadow_page_lockless_begin(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + atomic_inc(&vcpu->kvm->arch.reader_counter);
> +
> + /* Increase the counter before walking shadow page table */
> + smp_mb__after_atomic_inc();
> +}
> +
> +static void walk_shadow_page_lockless_end(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + /* Decrease the counter after walking shadow page table finished */
> + smp_mb__before_atomic_dec();
> + atomic_dec(&vcpu->kvm->arch.reader_counter);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +}
> +
> static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache,
> struct kmem_cache *base_cache, int min)
> {
> @@ -1600,17 +1677,23 @@ static bool shadow_walk_okay(struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator *iterator)
> return true;
> }
>
> -static void shadow_walk_next(struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator *iterator)
> +static void __shadow_walk_next(struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator *iterator,
> + u64 spte)
> {
> - if (is_last_spte(*iterator->sptep, iterator->level)) {
> + if (is_last_spte(spte, iterator->level)) {
> iterator->level = 0;
> return;
> }
>
> - iterator->shadow_addr = *iterator->sptep & PT64_BASE_ADDR_MASK;
> + iterator->shadow_addr = spte & PT64_BASE_ADDR_MASK;
> --iterator->level;
> }
>
> +static void shadow_walk_next(struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator *iterator)
> +{
> + return __shadow_walk_next(iterator, *iterator->sptep);
> +}
> +
> static void link_shadow_page(u64 *sptep, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> {
> u64 spte;
> @@ -1757,6 +1840,30 @@ static int kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static void kvm_mmu_isolate_pages(struct list_head *invalid_list)
> +{
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(sp, invalid_list, link)
> + kvm_mmu_isolate_page(sp);
> +}
> +
> +static void free_pages_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
> +{
> + struct kvm_mmu_page *next, *sp;
> +
> + sp = container_of(head, struct kvm_mmu_page, rcu);
> + while (sp) {
> + if (!list_empty(&sp->link))
> + next = list_first_entry(&sp->link,
> + struct kvm_mmu_page, link);
> + else
> + next = NULL;
> + kvm_mmu_free_page(sp);
> + sp = next;
> + }
> +}
There is no need for this while loop.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists