[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8f8b4041abb730ed7dec97aaa7a8273fe680d87a.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 10:53:33 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "chenhuacai@...nel.org" <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, "frankja@...ux.ibm.com"
<frankja@...ux.ibm.com>, "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>,
"borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com" <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>, "pjw@...nel.org"
<pjw@...nel.org>, "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"maobibo@...ngson.cn" <maobibo@...ngson.cn>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "maddy@...ux.ibm.com" <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
"palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>, "imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com"
<imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>, "zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn"
<zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn>, "anup@...infault.org" <anup@...infault.org>,
"oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev"
<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
"michael.roth@....com" <michael.roth@....com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
"loongarch@...ts.linux.dev" <loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>,
"binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>,
"ackerleytng@...gle.com" <ackerleytng@...gle.com>, "kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev"
<kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>, "kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org"
<kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "Edgecombe,
Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "linux-mips@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 24/25] KVM: TDX: Guard VM state transitions with "all"
the locks
>
> +typedef void *tdx_vm_state_guard_t;
> +
> +static tdx_vm_state_guard_t tdx_acquire_vm_state_locks(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + int r;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> +
> + if (kvm->created_vcpus != atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus)) {
> + r = -EBUSY;
> + goto out_err;
> + }
> +
> + r = kvm_lock_all_vcpus(kvm);
> + if (r)
> + goto out_err;
> +
> + /*
> + * Note the unintuitive ordering! vcpu->mutex must be taken outside
> + * kvm->slots_lock!
> + */
> + mutex_lock(&kvm->slots_lock);
> + return kvm;
> +
> +out_err:
> + mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> + return ERR_PTR(r);
> +}
> +
> +static void tdx_release_vm_state_locks(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + mutex_unlock(&kvm->slots_lock);
> + kvm_unlock_all_vcpus(kvm);
> + mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> +}
> +
> +DEFINE_CLASS(tdx_vm_state_guard, tdx_vm_state_guard_t,
> + if (!IS_ERR(_T)) tdx_release_vm_state_locks(_T),
> + tdx_acquire_vm_state_locks(kvm), struct kvm *kvm);
> +
> static int tdx_td_init(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_tdx_cmd *cmd)
> {
> struct kvm_tdx_init_vm __user *user_data = u64_to_user_ptr(cmd->data);
> @@ -2644,6 +2684,10 @@ static int tdx_td_init(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_tdx_cmd *cmd)
> BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*init_vm) != 256 + sizeof_field(struct kvm_tdx_init_vm, cpuid));
> BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct td_params) != 1024);
>
> + CLASS(tdx_vm_state_guard, guard)(kvm);
> + if (IS_ERR(guard))
> + return PTR_ERR(guard);
> +
> if (kvm_tdx->state != TD_STATE_UNINITIALIZED)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> @@ -2743,7 +2787,9 @@ static int tdx_td_finalize(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_tdx_cmd *cmd)
> {
> struct kvm_tdx *kvm_tdx = to_kvm_tdx(kvm);
>
> - guard(mutex)(&kvm->slots_lock);
> + CLASS(tdx_vm_state_guard, guard)(kvm);
> + if (IS_ERR(guard))
> + return PTR_ERR(guard);
>
Since you are changing both tdx_td_init() and tdx_td_finalize(), maybe
just changing tdx_vm_ioctl() instead (like tdx_vcpu_unlocked_ioctl())?
This is not required for tdx_get_capabilities() but there's no harm to do
it too AFACIT.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists