Message-ID: <Yt8eC2OyolG9QE3g@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:49:47 -0700
From:   David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
        Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
        Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Tag disallowed NX huge pages even
 if they're not tracked

On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 01:23:20AM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Tag shadow pages that cannot be replaced with an NX huge page even if
> zapping the page would not allow KVM to create a huge page, e.g. because
> something else prevents creating a huge page.

This sentence looks messed up :). Should it read:

  Tag shadow pages that cannot be replaced with an NX huge page, e.g.
  because something else prevents creating a huge page.

?

> This will allow a future
> patch to more precisely apply the mitigation by checking if an existing
> shadow page can be replaced by a NX huge page.  Currently, KVM assumes
> that any existing shadow page encountered cannot be replaced by a NX huge
> page (if the mitigation is enabled), which prevents KVM from replacing
> no-longer-necessary shadow pages with huge pages, e.g. after disabling
> dirty logging, zapping from the mmu_notifier due to page migration,
> etc...
> 
> Failure to tag shadow pages appropriately could theoretically lead to
> false negatives, e.g. if a fetch fault requests a small page and thus
> isn't tracked, and a read/write fault later requests a huge page, KVM
> will not reject the huge page as it should.
> 
> To avoid yet another flag, initialize the list_head and use list_empty()
> to determine whether or not a page is on the list of NX huge pages that
> should be recovered.
> 
> Opportunstically rename most of the variables/functions involved to
> provide consistency, e.g. lpage vs huge page and NX huge vs huge NX, and
> clarity, e.g. to make it obvious the flag applies only to the NX huge
> page mitigation, not to any condition that prevents creating a huge page.
> 
> Fixes: 5bcaf3e1715f ("KVM: x86/mmu: Account NX huge page disallowed iff huge page was requested")
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |  6 +--
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c          | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h | 22 ++++++++--
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h  |  6 +--
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c      |  8 ++--
>  5 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index e8281d64a431..246b69262b93 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1143,7 +1143,7 @@ struct kvm_arch {
>  	struct hlist_head mmu_page_hash[KVM_NUM_MMU_PAGES];
>  	struct list_head active_mmu_pages;
>  	struct list_head zapped_obsolete_pages;
> -	struct list_head lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages;
> +	struct list_head possible_nx_huge_pages;
>  	struct kvm_page_track_notifier_node mmu_sp_tracker;
>  	struct kvm_page_track_notifier_head track_notifier_head;
>  	/*
> @@ -1304,8 +1304,8 @@ struct kvm_arch {
>  	 *  - tdp_mmu_roots (above)
>  	 *  - tdp_mmu_pages (above)
>  	 *  - the link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used by the TDP MMU
> -	 *  - lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages
> -	 *  - the lpage_disallowed_link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used
> +	 *  - possible_nx_huge_pages;
> +	 *  - the possible_nx_huge_page_link field of struct kvm_mmu_pages used
>  	 *    by the TDP MMU
>  	 * It is acceptable, but not necessary, to acquire this lock when
>  	 * the thread holds the MMU lock in write mode.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index 8e477333a263..1112e3a4cf3e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> @@ -802,15 +802,43 @@ static void account_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>  		kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_address(kvm, gfn, 1);
>  }
>  
> -void account_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +static void untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm,
> +					  struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>  {
> -	if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> +	if (list_empty(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link))
> +		return;
> +
> +	--kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> +	list_del_init(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +}
> +
> +void unaccount_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +{
> +	sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed = false;
> +
> +	untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
> +}
> +
> +static void track_possible_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm,
> +					struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> +{
> +	if (!list_empty(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link))
>  		return;
>  
>  	++kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> -	list_add_tail(&sp->lpage_disallowed_link,
> -		      &kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages);
> -	sp->lpage_disallowed = true;
> +	list_add_tail(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link,
> +		      &kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages);
> +}
> +
> +void account_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> +			  bool nx_huge_page_possible)
> +{
> +	sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed = true;
> +
> +	if (!nx_huge_page_possible)
> +		untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);

What would be a scenario where calling untrack_possible_nx_huge_page()
is actually necessary here?

> +	else
> +		track_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
>  }
>  
>  static void unaccount_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> @@ -830,13 +858,6 @@ static void unaccount_shadowed(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>  	kvm_mmu_gfn_allow_lpage(slot, gfn);
>  }
>  
> -void unaccount_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> -{
> -	--kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
> -	sp->lpage_disallowed = false;
> -	list_del(&sp->lpage_disallowed_link);
> -}
> -
>  static struct kvm_memory_slot *
>  gfn_to_memslot_dirty_bitmap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
>  			    bool no_dirty_log)
> @@ -2115,6 +2136,8 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *kvm_mmu_alloc_shadow_page(struct kvm *kvm,
>  
>  	set_page_private(virt_to_page(sp->spt), (unsigned long)sp);
>  
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * active_mmu_pages must be a FIFO list, as kvm_zap_obsolete_pages()
>  	 * depends on valid pages being added to the head of the list.  See
> @@ -2472,8 +2495,8 @@ static bool __kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(struct kvm *kvm,
>  		zapped_root = !is_obsolete_sp(kvm, sp);
>  	}
>  
> -	if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> -		unaccount_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> +	if (sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed)
> +		unaccount_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
>  
>  	sp->role.invalid = 1;
>  
> @@ -3112,9 +3135,9 @@ static int __direct_map(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault)
>  			continue;
>  
>  		link_shadow_page(vcpu, it.sptep, sp);
> -		if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed &&
> -		    fault->req_level >= it.level)
> -			account_huge_nx_page(vcpu->kvm, sp);
> +		if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed)
> +			account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp,
> +					     fault->req_level >= it.level);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(it.level != fault->goal_level))
> @@ -5970,7 +5993,7 @@ int kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
>  
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.active_mmu_pages);
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.zapped_obsolete_pages);
> -	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages);
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages);
>  	spin_lock_init(&kvm->arch.mmu_unsync_pages_lock);
>  
>  	r = kvm_mmu_init_tdp_mmu(kvm);
> @@ -6845,23 +6868,25 @@ static void kvm_recover_nx_lpages(struct kvm *kvm)

Can you rename this to kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages() while you're here?

>  	ratio = READ_ONCE(nx_huge_pages_recovery_ratio);
>  	to_zap = ratio ? DIV_ROUND_UP(nx_lpage_splits, ratio) : 0;
>  	for ( ; to_zap; --to_zap) {
> -		if (list_empty(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages))
> +		if (list_empty(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages))
>  			break;
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * We use a separate list instead of just using active_mmu_pages
> -		 * because the number of lpage_disallowed pages is expected to
> -		 * be relatively small compared to the total.
> +		 * because the number of shadow pages that be replaced with an
> +		 * NX huge page is expected to be relatively small compared to
> +		 * the total number of shadow pages.  And because the TDP MMU
> +		 * doesn't use active_mmu_pages.
>  		 */
> -		sp = list_first_entry(&kvm->arch.lpage_disallowed_mmu_pages,
> +		sp = list_first_entry(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages,
>  				      struct kvm_mmu_page,
> -				      lpage_disallowed_link);
> -		WARN_ON_ONCE(!sp->lpage_disallowed);
> +				      possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(!sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed);
>  		if (is_tdp_mmu_page(sp)) {
>  			flush |= kvm_tdp_mmu_zap_sp(kvm, sp);
>  		} else {
>  			kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(kvm, sp, &invalid_list);
> -			WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->lpage_disallowed);
> +			WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed);
>  		}
>  
>  		if (need_resched() || rwlock_needbreak(&kvm->mmu_lock)) {
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> index 582def531d4d..ff4ca54b9dda 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> @@ -57,7 +57,13 @@ struct kvm_mmu_page {
>  	bool tdp_mmu_page;
>  	bool unsync;
>  	u8 mmu_valid_gen;
> -	bool lpage_disallowed; /* Can't be replaced by an equiv large page */
> +
> +	 /*
> +	  * The shadow page can't be replaced by an equivalent huge page
> +	  * because it is being used to map an executable page in the guest
> +	  * and the NX huge page mitigation is enabled.
> +	  */
> +	bool nx_huge_page_disallowed;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * The following two entries are used to key the shadow page in the
> @@ -100,7 +106,14 @@ struct kvm_mmu_page {
>  		};
>  	};
>  
> -	struct list_head lpage_disallowed_link;
> +	/*
> +	 * Use to track shadow pages that, if zapped, would allow KVM to create
> +	 * an NX huge page.  A shadow page will have nx_huge_page_disallowed
> +	 * set but not be on the list if a huge page is disallowed for other
> +	 * reasons, e.g. because KVM is shadowing a PTE at the same gfn, the
> +	 * memslot isn't properly aligned, etc...
> +	 */
> +	struct list_head possible_nx_huge_page_link;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
>  	/*
>  	 * Used out of the mmu-lock to avoid reading spte values while an
> @@ -315,7 +328,8 @@ void disallowed_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_page_fault *fault, u64 spte, int cur_
>  
>  void *mmu_memory_cache_alloc(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *mc);
>  
> -void account_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
> -void unaccount_huge_nx_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
> +void account_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> +			  bool nx_huge_page_possible);
> +void unaccount_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp);
>  
>  #endif /* __KVM_X86_MMU_INTERNAL_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> index f5958071220c..259c0f019f09 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> @@ -713,9 +713,9 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault,
>  			continue;
>  
>  		link_shadow_page(vcpu, it.sptep, sp);
> -		if (fault->huge_page_disallowed &&
> -		    fault->req_level >= it.level)
> -			account_huge_nx_page(vcpu->kvm, sp);
> +		if (fault->huge_page_disallowed)
> +			account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp,
> +					     fault->req_level >= it.level);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(it.level != fault->goal_level))
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> index 40ccb5fba870..a30983947fee 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,8 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *tdp_mmu_alloc_sp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  static void tdp_mmu_init_sp(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, tdp_ptep_t sptep,
>  			    gfn_t gfn, union kvm_mmu_page_role role)
>  {
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link);
> +
>  	set_page_private(virt_to_page(sp->spt), (unsigned long)sp);
>  
>  	sp->role = role;
> @@ -390,8 +392,8 @@ static void tdp_mmu_unlink_sp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
>  		lockdep_assert_held_write(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>  
>  	list_del(&sp->link);
> -	if (sp->lpage_disallowed)
> -		unaccount_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> +	if (sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed)
> +		unaccount_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
>  
>  	if (shared)
>  		spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> @@ -1134,7 +1136,7 @@ static int tdp_mmu_link_sp(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter,
>  	spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
>  	list_add(&sp->link, &kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages);
>  	if (account_nx)
> -		account_huge_nx_page(kvm, sp);
> +		account_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp, true);


account_nx is fault->huge_page_disallowed && fault->req_level >=
iter.level. So this is equivalent to:

  if (fault->huge_page_disallowed && fault->req_level >= iter.level)
          account_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp, true);

Whereas __direct_map() uses:

  if (fault->is_tdp && fault->huge_page_disallowed)
        account_nx_huge_page(vcpu->kvm, sp, fault->req_level >= it.level);

Aside from is_tdp (which you cover in another patch), why is there a
discrepancy in the NX Huge Page accounting?

>  	spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
>  
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 2.37.1.359.gd136c6c3e2-goog
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists