[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <afacb9fb28259d154c0a6a9d30089b7bb057cd61.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 02:56:18 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
<seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "Annapurve, Vishal"
<vannapurve@...gle.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
"michael.roth@....com" <michael.roth@....com>, "Weiny, Ira"
<ira.weiny@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/12] KVM: TDX: Use atomic64_dec_return() instead of
a poor equivalent
On Tue, 2025-08-26 at 17:05 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Use atomic64_dec_return() when decrementing the number of "pre-mapped"
> S-EPT pages to ensure that the count can't go negative without KVM
> noticing. In theory, checking for '0' and then decrementing in a separate
> operation could miss a 0=>-1 transition. In practice, such a condition is
> impossible because nr_premapped is protected by slots_lock, i.e. doesn't
> actually need to be an atomic (that wart will be addressed shortly).
>
> Don't bother trying to keep the count non-negative, as the KVM_BUG_ON()
> ensures the VM is dead, i.e. there's no point in trying to limp along.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
This area has gone through a lot of designs. In the v19 era PAGE.ADD got
performed deep inside the fault by stuffing the source page in the vCPU. Then we
switched to having userspace call KVM_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY manually to pre-populare
the mirror EPT, and then have TDX code look up the PFN. Then nearer the end, we
switched to current code which does something like KVM_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY
internally, then looks up what got faulted and does the PAGE.ADD. Then the
version in this series which does it even more directly.
nr_premapped got added during the KVM_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY era. I personally didn't
like it, but it was needed because userspace could do unexpected things. Now it
seems like its only purpose is to generate a KVM_BUG_ON() in
tdx_sept_zap_private_spte(). I wonder if we could drop it all together and
accept less KVM_BUG_ON() coverage. It seems weird to focus in on this specific
error case.
Yan, am I missing something?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists