linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 11/19] KVM: x86/mmu: Factor shadow_zero_check out of make

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]

Date:   Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:49:44 -0800
From:   Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
        Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@...il.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
        Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
        Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@...wei.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 11/19] KVM: x86/mmu: Factor shadow_zero_check out of make_spte

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 2:45 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/10/21 23:30, Ben Gardon wrote:
> > -     WARN_ONCE(is_rsvd_spte(&vcpu->arch.mmu->shadow_zero_check, spte, level),
> > +     WARN_ONCE(is_rsvd_spte(shadow_zero_check, spte, level),
> >                 "spte = 0x%llx, level = %d, rsvd bits = 0x%llx", spte, level,
> > -               get_rsvd_bits(&vcpu->arch.mmu->shadow_zero_check, spte, level));
> > +               get_rsvd_bits(shadow_zero_check, spte, level));
>
> Hmm, there is a deeper issue here, in that when using EPT/NPT (on either
> the legacy aka shadow or the TDP MMU) large parts of vcpu->arch.mmu are
> really the same for all vCPUs.  The only thing that varies is those
> parts that actually depend on the guest's paging mode---the extended
> role, the reserved bits, etc.  Those are needed by the emulator, but
> don't really belong in vcpu->arch.mmu when EPT/NPT is in use.
>
> I wonder if there's room for splitting kvm_mmu in two parts, such as
> kvm_mmu and kvm_guest_paging_context, and possibly change the walk_mmu
> pointer into a pointer to kvm_guest_paging_context.  This way the
> EPT/NPT MMU (again either shadow or TDP) can be moved to kvm->arch.  It
> should simplify this series and also David's work on eager page splitting.
>
> I'm not asking you to do this, of course, but perhaps I can trigger
> Sean's itch to refactor stuff. :)
>
> Paolo
>

I think that's a great idea. I'm frequently confused as to why the
struct kvm_mmu is a per-vcpu construct as opposed to being VM-global.
Moving part of the struct to be a member for struct kvm would also
open the door to formalizing the MMU interface a little better and
perhaps even reveal more MMU code that can be consolidated across
architectures.