linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 13/16] kvm: arm64: Configure VTCR per VM

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:24:58 +0000
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To:     Christoffer Dall <cdall@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@....com>,
        Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Christoffer Dall <cdall@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 13/16] kvm: arm64: Configure VTCR per VM


Hi Christoffer,

On 08/02/18 18:04, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:04:08PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> We set VTCR_EL2 very early during the stage2 init and don't
>> touch it ever. This is fine as we had a fixed IPA size. This
>> patch changes the behavior to set the VTCR for a given VM,
>> depending on its stage2 table. The common configuration for
>> VTCR is still performed during the early init. But the SL0
>> and T0SZ are programmed for each VM and is cleared once we
>> exit the VM.
>>
>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
>> Cc: Christoffer Dall <cdall@...aro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>

>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
>> index f7c651f3a8c0..523471f0af7b 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
>> @@ -157,11 +157,20 @@ static void __hyp_text __deactivate_traps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   static void __hyp_text __activate_vm(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   {
>>    struct kvm *kvm = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->kvm);
>> + u64 vtcr = read_sysreg(vtcr_el2);
>> +
>> + vtcr &= ~VTCR_EL2_PRIVATE_MASK;
>> + vtcr |= VTCR_EL2_SL0(stage2_pt_levels(kvm)) |
>> + VTCR_EL2_T0SZ(kvm_phys_shift(kvm));
>> + write_sysreg(vtcr, vtcr_el2);
> 
> If we're writing VTCR_EL2 on each entry, do we really need to read the
> value back first and calculate things on every entry to the VM?  It
> seems to me we should be able to compute the vtcr_el2 and store it on
> struct kvm, and simply restore that per-VM value upon entering the VM?

I took a look at this and we need to do this to make sure we retain the
Hardware update of Access flags for stage2 (VTCR_EL2_HA) bits on the CPUs
that has it and it is safe to run a mix of CPUs with and without the feature.

>>    write_sysreg(kvm->arch.vttbr, vttbr_el2);
>>   }
>>
>>   static void __hyp_text __deactivate_vm(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   {
>> + u64 vtcr = read_sysreg(vtcr_el2) & ~VTCR_EL2_PRIVATE_MASK;
>> +
>> + write_sysreg(vtcr, vtcr_el2);
> 
> Why do we need to care about restoring VTCR when returning to the host?

Yes, this can be skipped.

Cheers
Suzuki