linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v12 02/33] KVM: Use gfn instead of hva for mmu_notifier

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: <ZQMWjbt/SzKvag2K@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2023 07:19:57 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@...gle.com>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
        Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>,
        Maciej Szmigiero <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
        Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>,
        Liam Merwick <liam.merwick@...cle.com>,
        Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 02/33] KVM: Use gfn instead of hva for mmu_notifier_retry

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023, Binbin Wu wrote:
> 
> On 9/14/2023 9:55 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > +void kvm_mmu_invalidate_end(struct kvm *kvm)
> >   {
> >   	/*
> >   	 * This sequence increase will notify the kvm page fault that
> > @@ -833,6 +848,13 @@ void kvm_mmu_invalidate_end(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start,
> >   	 * in conjunction with the smp_rmb in mmu_invalidate_retry().
> >   	 */
> >   	kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress--;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Assert that at least one range must be added between start() and
> > +	 * end().  Not adding a range isn't fatal, but it is a KVM bug.
> > +	 */
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress &&
> > +		     kvm->mmu_invalidate_range_start == INVALID_GPA);
> Should the check happen before the decrease of kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress?
> Otherwise, KVM calls kvm_mmu_invalidate_begin(), then kvm_mmu_invalidate_end()
> the check will not take effect.

Indeed.  I'm pretty sure I added this code, not sure what I was thinking.  There's
no reason to check mmu_invalidate_in_progress, it's not like KVM allows
mmu_invalidate_in_progress to go negative.  The comment is also a bit funky.  I'll
post a fixup patch to make it look like this (assuming I'm not forgetting a subtle
reason for guarding the check with the in-progress flag):

	/*
	 * Assert that at least one range was added between start() and end().
	 * Not adding a range isn't fatal, but it is a KVM bug.
	 */
	WARN_ON_ONCE(kvm->mmu_invalidate_range_start == INVALID_GPA);

Regarding kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress, this would be a good opportunity to
move the BUG_ON() into the common end(), e.g. as is, an end() without a start()
from something other than the generic mmu_notifier would go unnoticed.  And I
_think_ we can replace the BUG_ON() with a KVM_BUG_ON() without putting the
kernel at risk.  E.g.

diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index dd948276e5d6..54480655bcce 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -870,6 +870,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_invalidate_end(struct kvm *kvm)
         * in conjunction with the smp_rmb in mmu_invalidate_retry().
         */
        kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress--;
+       KVM_BUG_ON(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress < 0, kvm);
 
        /*
         * Assert that at least one range was added between start() and end().
@@ -905,8 +906,6 @@ static void kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
         */
        if (wake)
                rcuwait_wake_up(&kvm->mn_memslots_update_rcuwait);
-
-       BUG_ON(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress < 0);
 }
 
 static int kvm_mmu_notifier_clear_flush_young(struct mmu_notifier *mn,