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: <diqz1prqvted.fsf@ackerleytng-ctop.c.googlers.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 14:51:38 -0700
From: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>
To: Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	x86@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, aik@....com, 
	ajones@...tanamicro.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, amoorthy@...gle.com, 
	anthony.yznaga@...cle.com, anup@...infault.org, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, 
	bfoster@...hat.com, binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com, brauner@...nel.org, 
	catalin.marinas@....com, chao.p.peng@...el.com, chenhuacai@...nel.org, 
	dave.hansen@...el.com, david@...hat.com, dmatlack@...gle.com, 
	dwmw@...zon.co.uk, erdemaktas@...gle.com, fan.du@...el.com, fvdl@...gle.com, 
	graf@...zon.com, haibo1.xu@...el.com, hch@...radead.org, hughd@...gle.com, 
	ira.weiny@...el.com, isaku.yamahata@...el.com, jack@...e.cz, 
	james.morse@....com, jarkko@...nel.org, jgg@...pe.ca, jgowans@...zon.com, 
	jhubbard@...dia.com, jroedel@...e.de, jthoughton@...gle.com, 
	jun.miao@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com, keirf@...gle.com, 
	kent.overstreet@...ux.dev, kirill.shutemov@...el.com, liam.merwick@...cle.com, 
	maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com, mail@...iej.szmigiero.name, maz@...nel.org, 
	mic@...ikod.net, mpe@...erman.id.au, muchun.song@...ux.dev, nikunj@....com, 
	nsaenz@...zon.es, oliver.upton@...ux.dev, palmer@...belt.com, 
	pankaj.gupta@....com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, 
	pdurrant@...zon.co.uk, peterx@...hat.com, pgonda@...gle.com, pvorel@...e.cz, 
	qperret@...gle.com, quic_cvanscha@...cinc.com, quic_eberman@...cinc.com, 
	quic_mnalajal@...cinc.com, quic_pderrin@...cinc.com, quic_pheragu@...cinc.com, 
	quic_svaddagi@...cinc.com, quic_tsoni@...cinc.com, richard.weiyang@...il.com, 
	rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com, roypat@...zon.co.uk, 
	rppt@...nel.org, seanjc@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org, steven.price@....com, 
	steven.sistare@...cle.com, suzuki.poulose@....com, tabba@...gle.com, 
	thomas.lendacky@....com, usama.arif@...edance.com, vannapurve@...gle.com, 
	vbabka@...e.cz, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, vkuznets@...hat.com, 
	wei.w.wang@...el.com, will@...nel.org, willy@...radead.org, 
	xiaoyao.li@...el.com, yan.y.zhao@...el.com, yilun.xu@...el.com, 
	yuzenghui@...wei.com, zhiquan1.li@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/51] KVM: guest_memfd: Introduce and use
 shareability to guard faulting

Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com> writes:

> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 04:41:41PM -0700, Ackerley Tng wrote:
>> Track guest_memfd memory's shareability status within the inode as
>> opposed to the file, since it is property of the guest_memfd's memory
>> contents.
>> 
>> Shareability is a property of the memory and is indexed using the
>> page's index in the inode. Because shareability is the memory's
>> property, it is stored within guest_memfd instead of within KVM, like
>> in kvm->mem_attr_array.
>> 
>> KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE in kvm->mem_attr_array must still be
>> retained to allow VMs to only use guest_memfd for private memory and
>> some other memory for shared memory.
>> 
>> Not all use cases require guest_memfd() to be shared with the host
>> when first created. Add a new flag, GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE,
>> which when set on KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD, initializes the memory as
>> private to the guest, and therefore not mappable by the
>> host. Otherwise, memory is shared until explicitly converted to
>> private.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>
>> Change-Id: If03609cbab3ad1564685c85bdba6dcbb6b240c0f
>> ---
>>  Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst |   5 ++
>>  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h       |   2 +
>>  virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c         | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  3 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> index 86f74ce7f12a..f609337ae1c2 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> @@ -6408,6 +6408,11 @@ belonging to the slot via its userspace_addr.
>>  The use of GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED will not be allowed for CoCo VMs.
>>  This is validated when the guest_memfd instance is bound to the VM.
>>  
>> +If the capability KVM_CAP_GMEM_CONVERSIONS is supported, then the 'flags' field
>> +supports GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE.  Setting GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE
>> +will initialize the memory for the guest_memfd as guest-only and not faultable
>> +by the host.
>> +
>
> KVM_CAP_GMEM_CONVERSION doesn't get introduced until later, so it seems
> like this flag should be deferred until that patch is in place. Is it
> really needed at that point though? Userspace would be able to set the
> initial state via KVM_GMEM_CONVERT_SHARED/PRIVATE ioctls.
>

I can move this change to the later patch. Thanks! Will fix in the next
revision.

> The mtree contents seems to get stored in the same manner in either case so
> performance-wise only the overhead of a few userspace<->kernel switches
> would be saved. Are there any other reasons?
>
> Otherwise, maybe just settle on SHARED as a documented default (since at
> least non-CoCo VMs would be able to reliably benefit) and let
> CoCo/GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED VMs set PRIVATE at whatever
> granularity makes sense for the architecture/guest configuration.
>

Because shared pages are split once any memory is allocated, having a
way to INIT_PRIVATE could avoid the split and then merge on
conversion. I feel that is enough value to have this config flag, what
do you think?

I guess we could also have userspace be careful not to do any allocation
before converting.

>>  See KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION2 for additional details.
>>  
>>  4.143 KVM_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> index 4cc824a3a7c9..d7df312479aa 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> @@ -1567,7 +1567,9 @@ struct kvm_memory_attributes {
>>  #define KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE           (1ULL << 3)
>>  
>>  #define KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD	_IOWR(KVMIO,  0xd4, struct kvm_create_guest_memfd)
>> +
>>  #define GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED	(1UL << 0)
>> +#define GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE	(1UL << 1)
>>  
>>  struct kvm_create_guest_memfd {
>>  	__u64 size;
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c b/virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c
>> index 239d0f13dcc1..590932499eba 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c
>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/falloc.h>
>>  #include <linux/fs.h>
>>  #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
>> +#include <linux/maple_tree.h>
>>  #include <linux/pseudo_fs.h>
>>  #include <linux/pagemap.h>
>>  
>> @@ -17,6 +18,24 @@ struct kvm_gmem {
>>  	struct list_head entry;
>>  };
>>  
>> +struct kvm_gmem_inode_private {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_GMEM_SHARED_MEM
>> +	struct maple_tree shareability;
>> +#endif
>> +};
>> +
>> +enum shareability {
>> +	SHAREABILITY_GUEST = 1,	/* Only the guest can map (fault) folios in this range. */
>> +	SHAREABILITY_ALL = 2,	/* Both guest and host can fault folios in this range. */
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct folio *kvm_gmem_get_folio(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index);
>> +
>> +static struct kvm_gmem_inode_private *kvm_gmem_private(struct inode *inode)
>> +{
>> +	return inode->i_mapping->i_private_data;
>> +}
>> +
>>  /**
>>   * folio_file_pfn - like folio_file_page, but return a pfn.
>>   * @folio: The folio which contains this index.
>> @@ -29,6 +48,58 @@ static inline kvm_pfn_t folio_file_pfn(struct folio *folio, pgoff_t index)
>>  	return folio_pfn(folio) + (index & (folio_nr_pages(folio) - 1));
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_GMEM_SHARED_MEM
>> +
>> +static int kvm_gmem_shareability_setup(struct kvm_gmem_inode_private *private,
>> +				      loff_t size, u64 flags)
>> +{
>> +	enum shareability m;
>> +	pgoff_t last;
>> +
>> +	last = (size >> PAGE_SHIFT) - 1;
>> +	m = flags & GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE ? SHAREABILITY_GUEST :
>> +						    SHAREABILITY_ALL;
>> +	return mtree_store_range(&private->shareability, 0, last, xa_mk_value(m),
>> +				 GFP_KERNEL);
>
> One really nice thing about using a maple tree is that it should get rid
> of a fairly significant startup delay for SNP/TDX when the entire xarray gets
> initialized with private attribute entries via KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> (which is the current QEMU default behavior).
>
> I'd originally advocated for sticking with the xarray implementation Fuad was
> using until we'd determined we really need it for HugeTLB support, but I'm
> sort of thinking it's already justified just based on the above.
>
> Maybe it would make sense for KVM memory attributes too?
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static enum shareability kvm_gmem_shareability_get(struct inode *inode,
>> +						 pgoff_t index)
>> +{
>> +	struct maple_tree *mt;
>> +	void *entry;
>> +
>> +	mt = &kvm_gmem_private(inode)->shareability;
>> +	entry = mtree_load(mt, index);
>> +	WARN(!entry,
>> +	     "Shareability should always be defined for all indices in inode.");
>> +
>> +	return xa_to_value(entry);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct folio *kvm_gmem_get_shared_folio(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index)
>> +{
>> +	if (kvm_gmem_shareability_get(inode, index) != SHAREABILITY_ALL)
>> +		return ERR_PTR(-EACCES);
>> +
>> +	return kvm_gmem_get_folio(inode, index);
>> +}
>> +
>> +#else
>> +
>> +static int kvm_gmem_shareability_setup(struct maple_tree *mt, loff_t size, u64 flags)
>> +{
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline struct folio *kvm_gmem_get_shared_folio(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index)
>> +{
>> +	WARN_ONCE("Unexpected call to get shared folio.")
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_KVM_GMEM_SHARED_MEM */
>> +
>>  static int __kvm_gmem_prepare_folio(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
>>  				    pgoff_t index, struct folio *folio)
>>  {
>> @@ -333,7 +404,7 @@ static vm_fault_t kvm_gmem_fault_shared(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>  
>>  	filemap_invalidate_lock_shared(inode->i_mapping);
>>  
>> -	folio = kvm_gmem_get_folio(inode, vmf->pgoff);
>> +	folio = kvm_gmem_get_shared_folio(inode, vmf->pgoff);
>>  	if (IS_ERR(folio)) {
>>  		int err = PTR_ERR(folio);
>>  
>> @@ -420,8 +491,33 @@ static struct file_operations kvm_gmem_fops = {
>>  	.fallocate	= kvm_gmem_fallocate,
>>  };
>>  
>> +static void kvm_gmem_free_inode(struct inode *inode)
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_gmem_inode_private *private = kvm_gmem_private(inode);
>> +
>> +	kfree(private);
>> +
>> +	free_inode_nonrcu(inode);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void kvm_gmem_destroy_inode(struct inode *inode)
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_gmem_inode_private *private = kvm_gmem_private(inode);
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_GMEM_SHARED_MEM
>> +	/*
>> +	 * mtree_destroy() can't be used within rcu callback, hence can't be
>> +	 * done in ->free_inode().
>> +	 */
>> +	if (private)
>> +		mtree_destroy(&private->shareability);
>> +#endif
>> +}
>> +
>>  static const struct super_operations kvm_gmem_super_operations = {
>>  	.statfs		= simple_statfs,
>> +	.destroy_inode	= kvm_gmem_destroy_inode,
>> +	.free_inode	= kvm_gmem_free_inode,
>>  };
>>  
>>  static int kvm_gmem_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
>> @@ -549,12 +645,26 @@ static const struct inode_operations kvm_gmem_iops = {
>>  static struct inode *kvm_gmem_inode_make_secure_inode(const char *name,
>>  						      loff_t size, u64 flags)
>>  {
>> +	struct kvm_gmem_inode_private *private;
>>  	struct inode *inode;
>> +	int err;
>>  
>>  	inode = alloc_anon_secure_inode(kvm_gmem_mnt->mnt_sb, name);
>>  	if (IS_ERR(inode))
>>  		return inode;
>>  
>> +	err = -ENOMEM;
>> +	private = kzalloc(sizeof(*private), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!private)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>> +	mt_init(&private->shareability);
>> +	inode->i_mapping->i_private_data = private;
>> +
>> +	err = kvm_gmem_shareability_setup(private, size, flags);
>> +	if (err)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>>  	inode->i_private = (void *)(unsigned long)flags;
>>  	inode->i_op = &kvm_gmem_iops;
>>  	inode->i_mapping->a_ops = &kvm_gmem_aops;
>> @@ -566,6 +676,11 @@ static struct inode *kvm_gmem_inode_make_secure_inode(const char *name,
>>  	WARN_ON_ONCE(!mapping_unevictable(inode->i_mapping));
>>  
>>  	return inode;
>> +
>> +out:
>> +	iput(inode);
>> +
>> +	return ERR_PTR(err);
>>  }
>>  
>>  static struct file *kvm_gmem_inode_create_getfile(void *priv, loff_t size,
>> @@ -654,6 +769,9 @@ int kvm_gmem_create(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_create_guest_memfd *args)
>>  	if (kvm_arch_vm_supports_gmem_shared_mem(kvm))
>>  		valid_flags |= GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED;
>>  
>> +	if (flags & GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_SUPPORT_SHARED)
>> +		valid_flags |= GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_INIT_PRIVATE;
>> +
>>  	if (flags & ~valid_flags)
>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>  
>> @@ -842,6 +960,8 @@ int kvm_gmem_get_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
>>  	if (!file)
>>  		return -EFAULT;
>>  
>> +	filemap_invalidate_lock_shared(file_inode(file)->i_mapping);
>> +
>
> I like the idea of using a write-lock/read-lock to protect write/read access
> to shareability state (though maybe not necessarily re-using filemap's
> invalidate lock), it's simple and still allows concurrent faulting in of gmem
> pages. One issue on the SNP side (which also came up in one of the gmem calls)
> is if we introduce support for tracking preparedness as discussed (e.g. via a
> new SHAREABILITY_GUEST_PREPARED state) the
> SHAREABILITY_GUEST->SHAREABILITY_GUEST_PREPARED transition would occur at
> fault-time, and so would need to take the write-lock and no longer allow for
> concurrent fault-handling.
>
> I was originally planning on introducing a new rw_semaphore with similar
> semantics to the rw_lock that Fuad previously had in his restricted mmap
> series[1] (and simiar semantics to filemap invalidate lock here). The main
> difference, to handle setting SHAREABILITY_GUEST_PREPARED within fault paths,
> was that in the case of a folio being present for an index, the folio lock would
> also need to be held in order to update the shareability state. Because
> of that, fault paths (which will always either have or allocate folio
> basically) can rely on the folio lock to guard shareability state in a more
> granular way and so can avoid a global write lock.
>
> They would still need to hold the read lock to access the tree however.
> Or more specifically, any paths that could allocate a folio need to take
> a read lock so there isn't a TOCTOU situation where shareability is
> being updated for an index for which a folio hasn't been allocated, but
> then just afterward the folio gets faulted in/allocated while the
> shareability state is already being updated which the understand that
> there was no folio around that needed locking.
>
> I had a branch with in-place conversion support for SNP[2] that added this
> lock reworking on top of Fuad's series along with preparation tracking,
> but I'm now planning to rebase that on top of the patches from this
> series that Sean mentioned[3] earlier:
>
>   KVM: guest_memfd: Add CAP KVM_CAP_GMEM_CONVERSION
>   KVM: Query guest_memfd for private/shared status
>   KVM: guest_memfd: Skip LRU for guest_memfd folios
>   KVM: guest_memfd: Introduce KVM_GMEM_CONVERT_SHARED/PRIVATE ioctls
>   KVM: guest_memfd: Introduce and use shareability to guard faulting
>   KVM: guest_memfd: Make guest mem use guest mem inodes instead of anonymous inodes
>
> but figured I'd mention it here in case there are other things to consider on
> the locking front.
>
> Definitely agree with Sean though that it would be nice to start identifying a
> common base of patches for the in-place conversion enablement for SNP, TDX, and
> pKVM so the APIs/interfaces for hugepages can be handled separately.
>
> -Mike
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20250328153133.3504118-1-tabba@google.com/
> [2] https://github.com/mdroth/linux/commits/mmap-swprot-v10-snp0-wip2/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/aC86OsU2HSFZkJP6@google.com/
>
>>  	folio = __kvm_gmem_get_pfn(file, slot, index, pfn, &is_prepared, max_order);
>>  	if (IS_ERR(folio)) {
>>  		r = PTR_ERR(folio);
>> @@ -857,8 +977,8 @@ int kvm_gmem_get_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
>>  		*page = folio_file_page(folio, index);
>>  	else
>>  		folio_put(folio);
>> -
>>  out:
>> +	filemap_invalidate_unlock_shared(file_inode(file)->i_mapping);
>>  	fput(file);
>>  	return r;
>>  }
>> -- 
>> 2.49.0.1045.g170613ef41-goog
>> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ