| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20240516171018.GJ168153@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 10:10:18 -0700
From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
Cc: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"dmatlack@...gle.com" <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"sagis@...gle.com" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
"Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"isaku.yamahata@...il.com" <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>,
isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/16] KVM: x86/tdp_mmu: Support TDX private mapping for
TDP MMU
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 02:00:32AM +0000,
"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-05-15 at 18:48 -0700, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:52:32PM +1200,
> > "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 15/05/2024 12:59 pm, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > > > From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
> > > >
> > > > Allocate mirrored page table for the private page table and implement MMU
> > > > hooks to operate on the private page table.
> > > >
> > > > To handle page fault to a private GPA, KVM walks the mirrored page table
> > > > in
> > > > unencrypted memory and then uses MMU hooks in kvm_x86_ops to propagate
> > > > changes from the mirrored page table to private page table.
> > > >
> > > > private KVM page fault |
> > > > | |
> > > > V |
> > > > private GPA | CPU protected EPTP
> > > > | | |
> > > > V | V
> > > > mirrored PT root | private PT root
> > > > | | |
> > > > V | V
> > > > mirrored PT --hook to propagate-->private PT
> > > > | | |
> > > > \--------------------+------\ |
> > > > | | |
> > > > | V V
> > > > | private guest page
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > non-encrypted memory | encrypted memory
> > > > |
> > > >
> > > > PT: page table
> > > > Private PT: the CPU uses it, but it is invisible to KVM. TDX module
> > > > manages
> > > > this table to map private guest pages.
> > > > Mirrored PT:It is visible to KVM, but the CPU doesn't use it. KVM uses it
> > > > to propagate PT change to the actual private PT.
> > > >
> > > > SPTEs in mirrored page table (refer to them as mirrored SPTEs hereafter)
> > > > can be modified atomically with mmu_lock held for read, however, the MMU
> > > > hooks to private page table are not atomical operations.
> > > >
> > > > To address it, a special REMOVED_SPTE is introduced and below sequence is
> > > > used when mirrored SPTEs are updated atomically.
> > > >
> > > > 1. Mirrored SPTE is first atomically written to REMOVED_SPTE.
> > > > 2. The successful updater of the mirrored SPTE in step 1 proceeds with the
> > > > following steps.
> > > > 3. Invoke MMU hooks to modify private page table with the target value.
> > > > 4. (a) On hook succeeds, update mirrored SPTE to target value.
> > > > (b) On hook failure, restore mirrored SPTE to original value.
> > > >
> > > > KVM TDP MMU ensures other threads will not overrite REMOVED_SPTE.
> > > >
> > > > This sequence also applies when SPTEs are atomiclly updated from
> > > > non-present to present in order to prevent potential conflicts when
> > > > multiple vCPUs attempt to set private SPTEs to a different page size
> > > > simultaneously, though 4K page size is only supported for private page
> > > > table currently.
> > > >
> > > > 2M page support can be done in future patches.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
> > > > Co-developed-by: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
> > > > Co-developed-by: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
> > > > Co-developed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > TDX MMU Part 1:
> > > > - Remove unnecessary gfn, access twist in
> > > > tdp_mmu_map_handle_target_level(). (Chao Gao)
> > > > - Open code call to kvm_mmu_alloc_private_spt() instead oCf doing it in
> > > > tdp_mmu_alloc_sp()
> > > > - Update comment in set_private_spte_present() (Yan)
> > > > - Open code call to kvm_mmu_init_private_spt() (Yan)
> > > > - Add comments on TDX MMU hooks (Yan)
> > > > - Fix various whitespace alignment (Yan)
> > > > - Remove pointless warnings and conditionals in
> > > > handle_removed_private_spte() (Yan)
> > > > - Remove redundant lockdep assert in tdp_mmu_set_spte() (Yan)
> > > > - Remove incorrect comment in handle_changed_spte() (Yan)
> > > > - Remove unneeded kvm_pfn_to_refcounted_page() and
> > > > is_error_noslot_pfn() check in kvm_tdp_mmu_map() (Yan)
> > > > - Do kvm_gfn_for_root() branchless (Rick)
> > > > - Update kvm_tdp_mmu_alloc_root() callers to not check error code (Rick)
> > > > - Add comment for stripping shared bit for fault.gfn (Chao)
> > > >
> > > > v19:
> > > > - drop CONFIG_KVM_MMU_PRIVATE
> > > >
> > > > v18:
> > > > - Rename freezed => frozen
> > > >
> > > > v14 -> v15:
> > > > - Refined is_private condition check in kvm_tdp_mmu_map().
> > > > Add kvm_gfn_shared_mask() check.
> > > > - catch up for struct kvm_range change
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h | 5 +
> > > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 25 +++
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 13 +-
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h | 19 +-
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_iter.h | 2 +-
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 269 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.h | 2 +-
> > > > 7 files changed, 293 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> > > > b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> > > > index 566d19b02483..d13cb4b8fce6 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> > > > @@ -95,6 +95,11 @@ KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0(set_tss_addr)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0(set_identity_map_addr)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0(get_mt_mask)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP(load_mmu_pgd)
> > > > +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL(link_private_spt)
> > > > +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL(free_private_spt)
> > > > +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL(set_private_spte)
> > > > +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL(remove_private_spte)
> > > > +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL(zap_private_spte)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP(has_wbinvd_exit)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP(get_l2_tsc_offset)
> > > > KVM_X86_OP(get_l2_tsc_multiplier)
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > > > b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > > > index d010ca5c7f44..20fa8fa58692 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > > > @@ -470,6 +470,7 @@ struct kvm_mmu {
> > > > int (*sync_spte)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > > > struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, int i);
> > > > struct kvm_mmu_root_info root;
> > > > + hpa_t private_root_hpa;
> > >
> > > Should we have
> > >
> > > struct kvm_mmu_root_info private_root;
> > >
> > > instead?
> >
> > Yes. And the private root allocation can be pushed down into TDP MMU.
>
> Why?
Because the only TDP MMU supports mirrored PT and the change of the root pt
allocation will be contained in TDP MMU. Also it will be symetric to
kvm_mmu_destroy() and kvm_tdp_mmu_destroy().
> [snip]
> > > > @@ -7263,6 +7266,12 @@ int kvm_mmu_vendor_module_init(void)
> > > > void kvm_mmu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > > > {
> > > > kvm_mmu_unload(vcpu);
> > > > + if (tdp_mmu_enabled) {
> > > > + read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
> > > > + mmu_free_root_page(vcpu->kvm, &vcpu->arch.mmu-
> > > > >private_root_hpa,
> > > > + NULL);
> > > > + read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > Hmm.. I don't quite like this, but sorry I kinda forgot why we need to to
> > > this here.
> > >
> > > Could you elaborate?
> > >
> > > Anyway, from common code's perspective, we need to have some clarification
> > > why we design to do it here.
> >
> > This should be cleaned up. It can be pushed down into
> > kvm_tdp_mmu_alloc_root().
> >
> > void kvm_tdp_mmu_alloc_root(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > allocate shared root
> > if (has_mirrort_pt)
> > allocate private root
> >
>
> Huh? This is kvm_mmu_destroy()...
> > > > free_mmu_pages(&vcpu->arch.root_mmu);
> > > > free_mmu_pages(&vcpu->arch.guest_mmu);
> > > > mmu_free_memory_caches(vcpu);
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> > > > b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> > > > index 0f1a9d733d9e..3a7fe9261e23 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h
> > > > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
> > > > #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
> > > > #include <asm/kvm_host.h>
> > > > +#include "mmu.h"
> > > > +
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_PROVE_MMU
> > > > #define KVM_MMU_WARN_ON(x) WARN_ON_ONCE(x)
> > > > #else
> > > > @@ -178,6 +180,16 @@ static inline void kvm_mmu_alloc_private_spt(struct
> > > > kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_m
> > > > sp->private_spt = kvm_mmu_memory_cache_alloc(&vcpu-
> > > > >arch.mmu_private_spt_cache);
> > > > }
> > > > +static inline gfn_t kvm_gfn_for_root(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page
> > > > *root,
> > > > + gfn_t gfn)
> > > > +{
> > > > + gfn_t gfn_for_root = kvm_gfn_to_private(kvm, gfn);
> > > > +
> > > > + /* Set shared bit if not private */
> > > > + gfn_for_root |= -(gfn_t)!is_private_sp(root) &
> > > > kvm_gfn_shared_mask(kvm);
> > > > + return gfn_for_root;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > static inline bool kvm_mmu_page_ad_need_write_protect(struct
> > > > kvm_mmu_page *sp)
> > > > {
> > > > /*
> > > > @@ -348,7 +360,12 @@ static inline int __kvm_mmu_do_page_fault(struct
> > > > kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t cr2_or_gp
> > > > int r;
> > > > if (vcpu->arch.mmu->root_role.direct) {
> > > > - fault.gfn = fault.addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Things like memslots don't understand the concept of a
> > > > shared
> > > > + * bit. Strip it so that the GFN can be used like normal,
> > > > and the
> > > > + * fault.addr can be used when the shared bit is needed.
> > > > + */
> > > > + fault.gfn = gpa_to_gfn(fault.addr) &
> > > > ~kvm_gfn_shared_mask(vcpu->kvm);
> > > > fault.slot = kvm_vcpu_gfn_to_memslot(vcpu, fault.gfn);
> > >
> > > Again, I don't think it's nessary for fault.gfn to still have the shared bit
> > > here?
> > >
> > > This kinda usage is pretty much the reason I want to get rid of
> > > kvm_gfn_shared_mask().
> >
> > We are going to flags like has_mirrored_pt and we have root page table
> > iterator
> > with types specified. I'll investigate how we can reduce (or eliminate)
> > those helper functions.
>
> Let's transition the abusers off and see whats left. I'm still waiting for an
> explanation of why they are bad when uses properly.
Sure. Let's untangle things one by one.
> [snip]
> >
> > > > /* The level of the root page given to the iterator */
> > > > int root_level;
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > for_each_tdp_pte_min_level(iter, root, PG_LEVEL_4K, start, end) {
> > > > @@ -1029,8 +1209,8 @@ static int tdp_mmu_map_handle_target_level(struct
> > > > kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > > > new_spte = make_mmio_spte(vcpu, iter->gfn, ACC_ALL);
> > > > else
> > > > wrprot = make_spte(vcpu, sp, fault->slot, ACC_ALL, iter-
> > > > >gfn,
> > > > - fault->pfn, iter->old_spte,
> > > > fault->prefetch, true,
> > > > - fault->map_writable, &new_spte);
> > > > + fault->pfn, iter->old_spte, fault-
> > > > >prefetch, true,
> > > > + fault->map_writable, &new_spte);
> > > > if (new_spte == iter->old_spte)
> > > > ret = RET_PF_SPURIOUS;
> > > > @@ -1108,6 +1288,8 @@ int kvm_tdp_mmu_map(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct
> > > > kvm_page_fault *fault)
> > > > struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> > > > struct tdp_iter iter;
> > > > struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
> > > > + gfn_t raw_gfn;
> > > > + bool is_private = fault->is_private && kvm_gfn_shared_mask(kvm);
> > >
> > > Ditto. I wish we can have 'has_mirrored_private_pt'.
> >
> > Which name do you prefer? has_mirrored_pt or has_mirrored_private_pt?
>
> Why not helpers that wrap vm_type like:
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/d4c96caffd2633a70a140861d91794cdb54c7655.camel@intel.com/
I followed the existing way. Anyway I'm fine with either way.
--
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists