linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] kvm/x86: Handle async PF in RCU read-side critical sections

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20171002144300.qotoywl4nos5peuy@tardis>
Date:   Mon, 2 Oct 2017 22:43:00 +0800
From:   Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kvm/x86: Handle async PF in RCU read-side critical
 sections

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 01:41:03PM +0000, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
[...]
> > 
> > Wanpeng, the callsite of kvm_async_pf_task_wait() in
> > kvm_handle_page_fault() is for nested scenario, right? I take it we
> > should handle it as if the fault happens when l1 guest is running in
> > kernel mode, so @user should be 0, right?
> 
> In that case we can schedule, actually.  The guest will let another
> process run.
> 
> In fact we could schedule safely most of the time in the
> !user_mode(regs) case, it's just that with PREEMPT=n there's no
> knowledge of whether we can do so.  This explains why we have never seen
> the bug before.
> 

Thanks, looks like I confused myself a little bit here. You are right.
So in PREEMPT=n kernel, we only couldn't schedule when the async PF
*interrupts* the *kernel*, while in the kvm_handle_page_fault(), we
actually didn't interrupt the kernel, so it's fine.

> I had already applied v1, can you rebase and resend please?  Thanks,
> 

Sure, I'm going to rename that parameter to "interrupt_kernel"(probably
a bad name"), indicating whether the async PF interrupts the kernel.

But it's a little bit late today, will do that tomorrow.

Regards,
Boqun


> Paolo
> 
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h | 4 ++--
> >  arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c           | 9 ++++++---
> >  arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c              | 2 +-
> >  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h
> > index bc62e7cbf1b1..0a5ae6bb128b 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h
> > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static inline long kvm_hypercall4(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1,
> >  bool kvm_para_available(void);
> >  unsigned int kvm_arch_para_features(void);
> >  void __init kvm_guest_init(void);
> > -void kvm_async_pf_task_wait(u32 token);
> > +void kvm_async_pf_task_wait(u32 token, int user);
> >  void kvm_async_pf_task_wake(u32 token);
> >  u32 kvm_read_and_reset_pf_reason(void);
> >  extern void kvm_disable_steal_time(void);
> > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static inline void kvm_spinlock_init(void)
> >  
> >  #else /* CONFIG_KVM_GUEST */
> >  #define kvm_guest_init() do {} while (0)
> > -#define kvm_async_pf_task_wait(T) do {} while(0)
> > +#define kvm_async_pf_task_wait(T, U) do {} while(0)
> >  #define kvm_async_pf_task_wake(T) do {} while(0)
> >  
> >  static inline bool kvm_para_available(void)
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> > index aa60a08b65b1..916f519e54c9 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
> > @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static struct kvm_task_sleep_node *_find_apf_task(struct kvm_task_sleep_head *b,
> >  	return NULL;
> >  }
> >  
> > -void kvm_async_pf_task_wait(u32 token)
> > +void kvm_async_pf_task_wait(u32 token, int user)
> >  {
> >  	u32 key = hash_32(token, KVM_TASK_SLEEP_HASHBITS);
> >  	struct kvm_task_sleep_head *b = &async_pf_sleepers[key];
> > @@ -140,7 +140,10 @@ void kvm_async_pf_task_wait(u32 token)
> >  
> >  	n.token = token;
> >  	n.cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > -	n.halted = is_idle_task(current) || preempt_count() > 1;
> > +	n.halted = is_idle_task(current) ||
> > +		   preempt_count() > 1 ||
> > +		   (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT) && !user) ||
> > +		   rcu_preempt_depth();
> >  	init_swait_queue_head(&n.wq);
> >  	hlist_add_head(&n.link, &b->list);
> >  	raw_spin_unlock(&b->lock);
> > @@ -268,7 +271,7 @@ do_async_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code)
> >  	case KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT:
> >  		/* page is swapped out by the host. */
> >  		prev_state = exception_enter();
> > -		kvm_async_pf_task_wait((u32)read_cr2());
> > +		kvm_async_pf_task_wait((u32)read_cr2(), user_mode(regs));
> >  		exception_exit(prev_state);
> >  		break;
> >  	case KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_READY:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > index eca30c1eb1d9..106d4a029a8a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -3837,7 +3837,7 @@ int kvm_handle_page_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 error_code,
> >  	case KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT:
> >  		vcpu->arch.apf.host_apf_reason = 0;
> >  		local_irq_disable();
> > -		kvm_async_pf_task_wait(fault_address);
> > +		kvm_async_pf_task_wait(fault_address, 0);
> >  		local_irq_enable();
> >  		break;
> >  	case KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_READY:
> > 
> 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)