[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ad0023fd2ea0297e7bfb8a6a9535b2b8b8f56093.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 07:36:57 +0300
From: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: Add helpers to wrap vcpu->srcu_idx and yell if
it's abused
On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 15:45 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-04-15 at 00:43 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Add wrappers to acquire/release KVM's SRCU lock when stashing the index
> > > in vcpu->src_idx, along with rudimentary detection of illegal usage,
> > > e.g. re-acquiring SRCU and thus overwriting vcpu->src_idx. Because the
> > > SRCU index is (currently) either 0 or 1, illegal nesting bugs can go
> > > unnoticed for quite some time and only cause problems when the nested
> > > lock happens to get a different index.
> > >
> > > Wrap the WARNs in PROVE_RCU=y, and make them ONCE, otherwise KVM will
> > > likely yell so loudly that it will bring the kernel to its knees.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> > > ---
>
> ...
>
> > Looks good to me overall.
> >
> > Note that there are still places that acquire the lock and store the idx into
> > a local variable, for example kvm_xen_vcpu_set_attr and such.
> > I didn't check yet if these should be converted as well.
>
> Using a local variable is ok, even desirable. Nested/multiple readers is not an
> issue, the bug fixed by patch 1 is purely that kvm_vcpu.srcu_idx gets corrupted.
Makes sense. I still recal *that* bug in AVIC inhibition where that srcu lock was
a major PITA, but now I remember that it was not due to nesting of the lock,
but rather fact that we attempted to call syncronize_srcu or something like that
with it held.
>
> In an ideal world, KVM would _only_ track the SRCU index in local variables, but
> that would require plumbing the local variable down into vcpu_enter_guest() and
> kvm_vcpu_block() so that SRCU can be unlocked prior to entering the guest or
> scheduling out the vCPU.
>
It all makes sense now - thanks.
Best regards,
Maxim Levistky
Powered by blists - more mailing lists