linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: Check the allocation of pv cpu mask

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

Message-ID: <61e2fd6f-effd-64d7-148a-1b1f9fda1449@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Sep 2020 09:01:59 +0800
From:   Haiwei Li <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc:     "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        "wanpengli@...cent.com" <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        "jmattson@...gle.com" <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        "joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: Check the allocation of pv cpu mask



On 20/9/3 18:39, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Haiwei Li <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com> writes:
> 
>> From: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
>>
>> check the allocation of per-cpu __pv_cpu_mask. Initialize ops only when
>> successful.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
>> ---
>>    arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
>>    1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> index 08320b0b2b27..d3c062e551d7 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> @@ -555,7 +555,6 @@ static void kvm_send_ipi_mask_allbutself(const
>> struct cpumask *mask, int vector)
>>    static void kvm_setup_pv_ipi(void)
>>    {
>>    	apic->send_IPI_mask = kvm_send_ipi_mask;
>> -	apic->send_IPI_mask_allbutself = kvm_send_ipi_mask_allbutself;
>>    	pr_info("setup PV IPIs\n");
>>    }
>>
>> @@ -654,7 +653,6 @@ static void __init kvm_guest_init(void)
>>    	}
>>
>>    	if (pv_tlb_flush_supported()) {
>> -		pv_ops.mmu.flush_tlb_others = kvm_flush_tlb_others;
>>    		pv_ops.mmu.tlb_remove_table = tlb_remove_table;
>>    		pr_info("KVM setup pv remote TLB flush\n");
>>    	}
>> @@ -767,6 +765,14 @@ static __init int activate_jump_labels(void)
>>    }
>>    arch_initcall(activate_jump_labels);
>>
>> +static void kvm_free_pv_cpu_mask(void)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int cpu;
>> +
>> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
>> +		free_cpumask_var(per_cpu(__pv_cpu_mask, cpu));
>> +}
>> +
>>    static __init int kvm_alloc_cpumask(void)
>>    {
>>    	int cpu;
>> @@ -785,11 +791,21 @@ static __init int kvm_alloc_cpumask(void)
>>
>>    	if (alloc)
>>    		for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>> -			zalloc_cpumask_var_node(per_cpu_ptr(&__pv_cpu_mask, cpu),
>> -				GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu));
>> +			if (!zalloc_cpumask_var_node(
>> +				per_cpu_ptr(&__pv_cpu_mask, cpu),
>> +				GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)))
>> +				goto zalloc_cpumask_fail;
>>    		}
>>
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP)
>> +	apic->send_IPI_mask_allbutself = kvm_send_ipi_mask_allbutself;
>> +#endif
>> +	pv_ops.mmu.flush_tlb_others = kvm_flush_tlb_others;
> 
> This is too late I'm afraid. If I'm not mistaken PV patching happens
> earlier, so .init.guest_late_init (kvm_guest_init()) is good and
> arch_initcall() is bad.

.init.guest_late_init (kvm_guest_init()) is called before 
arch_initcall() and kvm_flush_tlb_others && kvm_send_ipi_mask_allbutself 
rely on __pv_cpu_mask.  So, i can not put this assign in kvm_guest_init().

> 
> Have you checked that with this patch kvm_flush_tlb_others() is still
> being called?

yes. I add a printk and i get the log.

> 
> Actually, there is no need to assign kvm_flush_tlb_others() so late. We
> can always check if __pv_cpu_mask was allocated and revert back to the
> architectural path if not.
I am sorry i don't really understand. Can you explain in more detail? Thx.

> 
>>    	return 0;
>> +
>> +zalloc_cpumask_fail:
>> +	kvm_free_pv_cpu_mask();
>> +	return -ENOMEM;
>>    }
>>    arch_initcall(kvm_alloc_cpumask);
>>
>> --
>> 2.18.4
>>
>