[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29c41f43-a8c6-3d72-8647-d46782094524@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:38:33 -0400
From: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mtosatti@...hat.com, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org,
pbonzini@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [Patch v2] KVM: x86: Initializing all kvm_lapic_irq fields in
ioapic_write_indirect
On 3/13/20 9:25 AM, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com> writes:
>
>> Previously all fields of structure kvm_lapic_irq were not initialized
>> before it was passed to kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus(). Which will cause
>> an issue when any of those fields are used for processing a request.
>> For example not initializing the msi_redir_hint field before passing
>> to the kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus(), may lead to a misbehavior of
>> kvm_apic_map_get_dest_lapic(). This will specifically happen when the
>> kvm_lowest_prio_delivery() returns TRUE due to a non-zero garbage
>> value of msi_redir_hint, which should not happen as the request belongs
>> to APIC fixed delivery mode and we do not want to deliver the
>> interrupt only to the lowest priority candidate.
>>
>> This patch initializes all the fields of kvm_lapic_irq based on the
>> values of ioapic redirect_entry object before passing it on to
>> kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus().
>>
>> Fixes: 7ee30bc132c6("KVM: x86: deliver KVM IOAPIC scan request to target vCPUs")
>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c | 7 +++++--
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
>> index 7668fed..3a8467d 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
>> @@ -378,12 +378,15 @@ static void ioapic_write_indirect(struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic, u32 val)
>> if (e->fields.delivery_mode == APIC_DM_FIXED) {
>> struct kvm_lapic_irq irq;
>>
>> - irq.shorthand = APIC_DEST_NOSHORT;
>> irq.vector = e->fields.vector;
>> irq.delivery_mode = e->fields.delivery_mode << 8;
>> - irq.dest_id = e->fields.dest_id;
>> irq.dest_mode =
>> kvm_lapic_irq_dest_mode(!!e->fields.dest_mode);
>> + irq.level = 1;
> 'level' is bool in struct kvm_lapic_irq but other than that, is there a
> reason we set it to 'true' here? I understand that any particular
> setting is likely better than random
Yes, that is the only reason which I had in my mind while doing this change.
I was not particularly sure about the value, so I copied what ioapic_serivce()
is doing.
> and it should actually not be used
> without setting it first but still?
>
>> + irq.trig_mode = e->fields.trig_mode;
>> + irq.shorthand = APIC_DEST_NOSHORT;
>> + irq.dest_id = e->fields.dest_id;
>> + irq.msi_redir_hint = false;
>> bitmap_zero(&vcpu_bitmap, 16);
>> kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus(ioapic->kvm, &irq,
>> &vcpu_bitmap);
--
Thanks
Nitesh
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists