[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87a74s9ehb.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 20:01:04 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/kvm: Disable KVM_ASYNC_PF_SEND_ALWAYS
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 7:47 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>> The host knows exactly when it injects a async PF and it can store CR2
>> and reason of that async PF in flight.
>>
>> On the next VMEXIT it checks whether apf_reason is 0. If apf_reason is 0
>> then it knows that the guest has read CR2 and apf_reason. All good
>> nothing to worry about.
>>
>> If not it needs to be careful.
>>
>> As long as the apf_reason of the last async #PF is not cleared by the
>> guest no new async #PF can be injected. That's already correct because
>> in that case IF==0 which prevents a nested async #PF.
>>
>> If MCE, NMI trigger a real pagefault then the #PF injection needs to
>> clear apf_reason and set the correct CR2. When that #PF returns then the
>> old CR2 and apf_reason need to be restored.
>
> How is the host supposed to know when the #PF returns? Intercepting
> IRET sounds like a bad idea and, in any case, is not actually a
> reliable indication that #PF returned.
The host does not care about the IRET. It solely has to check whether
apf_reason is 0 or not. That way it knows that the guest has read CR2
and apf_reason.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists