On 07/12/2010 10:16 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 07:15:50PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
Currently, when we fetch an spte, we only verify that gptes match those that
the walker saw if we build new shadow pages for them.

However, this misses the following race:

   vcpu1            vcpu2

   walk
                   change gpte
                   walk
                   instantiate sp

   fetch existing sp

Fix by validating every gpte, regardless of whether it is used for building
a new sp or not.

Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity<[email protected]>
---
  arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h |   44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
  1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
index 441f51c..89b2dab 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h
@@ -310,7 +310,8 @@ static bool FNAME(validate_indirect_spte)(struct kvm_vcpu 
*vcpu,
                                  gw->pte_gpa[level - 1],
                                &curr_pte, sizeof(curr_pte));
        if (r || curr_pte != gw->ptes[level - 1]) {
-               kvm_mmu_put_page(sp, sptep);
+               if (sp)
+                       kvm_mmu_put_page(sp, sptep);
                return false;
        }
        return true;
@@ -325,10 +326,11 @@ static u64 *FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t 
addr,
                         int *ptwrite, pfn_t pfn)
  {
        unsigned access = gw->pt_access;
-       struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
+       struct kvm_mmu_page *uninitialized_var(sp);
        u64 *sptep = NULL;
        int uninitialized_var(level);
        bool dirty = is_dirty_gpte(gw->ptes[gw->level - 1]);
+       int top_level;
        unsigned direct_access;
        struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator iterator;

@@ -339,34 +341,46 @@ static u64 *FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t 
addr,
        if (!dirty)
                direct_access&= ~ACC_WRITE_MASK;

+       top_level = vcpu->arch.mmu.root_level;
+       if (top_level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL)
+               top_level = PT32_ROOT_LEVEL;
+       /*
+        * Verify that the top-level gpte is still there.  Since the page
+        * is a root page, it is either write protected (and cannot be
+        * changed from now on) or it is invalid (in which case, we don't
+        * really care if it changes underneath us after this point).
+        */
+       if (!FNAME(validate_indirect_spte)(vcpu, NULL, NULL, gw, top_level))
+               goto out_error;
+
        for (shadow_walk_init(&iterator, vcpu, addr);
             shadow_walk_okay(&iterator)&&  iterator.level>  gw->level;
             shadow_walk_next(&iterator)) {
                gfn_t table_gfn;
+               bool new_page = false;

                level = iterator.level;
                sptep = iterator.sptep;

                drop_large_spte(vcpu, sptep);

-               if (is_shadow_present_pte(*sptep))
-                       continue;
-
-               table_gfn = gw->table_gfn[level - 2];
-               sp = kvm_mmu_get_page(vcpu, table_gfn, addr, level-1,
-                                     false, access, sptep);
+               if (!is_shadow_present_pte(*sptep)) {
+                       table_gfn = gw->table_gfn[level - 2];
+                       sp = kvm_mmu_get_page(vcpu, table_gfn, addr, level-1,
+                                             false, access, sptep);
+                       new_page = true;
+               }

                /*
                 * Verify that the gpte in the page we've just write
                 * protected is still there.
                 */
                if (!FNAME(validate_indirect_spte)(vcpu, sptep, sp,
-                                                  gw, level - 1)) {
-                       kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
-                       return NULL;
-               }
+                                                  gw, level - 1))
+                       goto out_error;
If its not a new page, and validation fails, can't "sp" point to
a shadow page previously instantiated in the loop?

It can, and then sp and sptep are inconsistent.  Good catch.

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to