[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFULd4YrhpPp+MvX5jeSfF54eEeQocs_Z5iY_N3rMGXMzx3RjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 23:31:26 +0200
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: VMX: Move IRQ invocation to assembly subroutine
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:21 PM Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:07 PM Sean Christopherson
> <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 03:40:24PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:56:33PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > Move the asm blob that invokes the appropriate IRQ handler after VM-Exit
> > > > into a proper subroutine. Slightly rework the blob so that it plays
> > > > nice with objtool without any additional hints (existing hints aren't
> > > > able to handle returning with a seemingly modified stack size).
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
> > > > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmenter.S | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 33 +++------------------------------
> > > > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmenter.S b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmenter.S
> > > > index 799db084a336..baec1e0fefc5 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmenter.S
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmenter.S
> > > > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > > > #include <asm/bitsperlong.h>
> > > > #include <asm/kvm_vcpu_regs.h>
> > > > #include <asm/nospec-branch.h>
> > > > +#include <asm/segment.h>
> > > >
> > > > #define WORD_SIZE (BITS_PER_LONG / 8)
> > > >
> > > > @@ -294,3 +295,30 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(vmread_error_trampoline)
> > > >
> > > > ret
> > > > SYM_FUNC_END(vmread_error_trampoline)
> > > > +
> > > > +SYM_FUNC_START(vmx_do_interrupt_nmi_irqoff)
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Unconditionally create a stack frame. RSP needs to be aligned for
> > > > + * x86-64, getting the correct RSP on the stack (for x86-64) would take
> > > > + * two instructions anyways, and it helps make objtool happy (see below).
> > > > + */
> > > > + push %_ASM_BP
> > > > + mov %rsp, %_ASM_BP
> > >
> > > RSP needs to be aligned to what? How would this align the stack, other
> > > than by accident?
> >
> > Ah, yeah, that's lacking info.
> >
> > 16-byte aligned to correctly mimic CPU behavior when vectoring an IRQ/NMI.
> > When not changing stack, the CPU aligns RSP before pushing the frame.
> >
> > The above shenanigans work because the x86-64 ABI also requires RSP to be
> > 16-byte aligned prior to CALL. RSP is thus 8-byte aligned due to CALL
> > pushing the return IP, and so creating the stack frame by pushing RBP makes
> > it 16-byte aliagned again.
>
> IIRC, the kernel violates x86_64 ABI and aligns RSP to 8 bytes prior
> to CALL. Please note -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3 in the compile
> flags.
+ push %_ASM_BP
+ mov %_ASM_SP, %_ASM_BP
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+ and $-16, %rsp"
+ push $__KERNEL_DS
+ push %rbp
+#endif
+ pushf
+ push $__KERNEL_CS
+ CALL_NOSPEC _ASM_ARG1
...
+ mov %_ASM_BP, %_ASM_SP
+ pop %_ASM_BP
+ ret
should work.
Uros.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists