linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 39/43] KVM: VMX: Don't do full kick when triggering posted interrupt "fails"

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <YXl4mK7CyUBnPaQV@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:04:40 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
        Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@...il.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
        Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>,
        Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 39/43] KVM: VMX: Don't do full kick when triggering
 posted interrupt "fails"

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 09/10/21 04:12, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > +		/*
> > +		 * The smp_wmb() in kvm_make_request() pairs with the smp_mb_*()
> > +		 * after setting vcpu->mode in vcpu_enter_guest(), thus the vCPU
> > +		 * is guaranteed to see the event request if triggering a posted
> > +		 * interrupt "fails" because vcpu->mode != IN_GUEST_MODE.
> 
> This explanation doesn't make much sense to me.  This is just the usual
> request/kick pattern explained in Documentation/virt/kvm/vcpu-requests.rst;
> except that we don't bother with a "kick" out of guest mode because the
> entry always goes through kvm_check_request (in the nVMX case) or
> sync_pir_to_irr (if non-nested) and completes the delivery itself.
> 
> In other word, it is a similar idea as patch 43/43.
> 
> What this smp_wmb() pair with, is the smp_mb__after_atomic in
> kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu).

I don't think that's correct.  There is no kvm_check_request() in the relevant path.
kvm_vcpu_exit_request() uses kvm_request_pending(), which is just a READ_ONCE()
without a barrier.  The smp_mb__after_atomic ensures that any assets that were
modified prior to making the request are seen by the vCPU handling the request.
It does not provide any guarantees for a different vCPU/task making a request
and checking vcpu->mode versus the target vCPU setting vcpu->mode and checking
for a pending request.

> Setting the interrupt in the PIR orders before kvm_make_request in this
> thread, and orders after kvm_make_request in the vCPU thread.
>
> Here, instead:
> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * The implied barrier in pi_test_and_set_on() pairs with the smp_mb_*()
> > +	 * after setting vcpu->mode in vcpu_enter_guest(), thus the vCPU is
> > +	 * guaranteed to see PID.ON=1 and sync the PIR to IRR if triggering a
> > +	 * posted interrupt "fails" because vcpu->mode != IN_GUEST_MODE.
> > +	 */
> >  	if (vcpu != kvm_get_running_vcpu() &&
> >  	    !kvm_vcpu_trigger_posted_interrupt(vcpu, false))
> > -		kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
> > +		kvm_vcpu_wake_up(vcpu);
> 
> it pairs with the smp_mb__after_atomic in vmx_sync_pir_to_irr().  As
> explained again in vcpu-requests.rst, the ON bit has the same function as
> vcpu->request in the previous case.

Same as above, I don't think that's correct.  The smp_mb__after_atomic() ensures
that there's no race between the IOMMU writing vIRR and setting ON, and KVM
clearing ON and processing the vIRR.

pi_test_on() is not an atomic operation, and there's no memory barrier if ON=0.
It's the same behavior as kvm_check_request(), but again the ordering with respect
to vcpu->mode isn't being handled by PID.ON/kvm_check_request().

AIUI, this is the barrier that's paired with the PI barriers.  This is even called
out in (2).

	vcpu->mode = IN_GUEST_MODE;

	srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, vcpu->srcu_idx);

	/*
	 * 1) We should set ->mode before checking ->requests.  Please see
	 * the comment in kvm_vcpu_exiting_guest_mode().
	 *
	 * 2) For APICv, we should set ->mode before checking PID.ON. This
	 * pairs with the memory barrier implicit in pi_test_and_set_on
	 * (see vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt).
	 *
	 * 3) This also orders the write to mode from any reads to the page
	 * tables done while the VCPU is running.  Please see the comment
	 * in kvm_flush_remote_tlbs.
	 */
	smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock();