On 05/24/2012 08:10 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> /* for kvm_memory_region::flags */
>> -#define KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES 1UL
>> +#define KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES 1UL
>> +#define KVM_MEM_READ_ONLY (1UL << 2)
>
> Bit 1 should be fine too, see below.
Okay.
>
>>
>> This ioctl allows the user to create or modify a guest physical memory
>> slot. When changing an existing slot, it may be moved in the guest
>> @@ -873,9 +874,11 @@ It is recommended that the lower 21 bits of
>> guest_phys_addr and userspace_addr
>> be identical. This allows large pages in the guest to be backed by large
>> pages in the host.
>>
>> -The flags field supports just one flag, KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES, which
>> +The flags field supports two flags, KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES, which
>> instructs kvm to keep track of writes to memory within the slot. See
>> -the KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG ioctl.
>> +the KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG ioctl. Another flag is KVM_MEM_READ_ONLY, which
>> +indicates the guest memory is read-only, that means, guest is only allowed
>> +to read it.
>
> + Writes will be posted to userspace as KVM_EXIT_MMIO exits.
Okay.
>
>>
>> /* for kvm_memory_region::flags */
>> -#define KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES 1UL
>> -#define KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID (1UL << 1)
>> +#define KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES 1UL
>> +#define KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID (1UL << 1)
>> +#define KVM_MEM_READ_ONLY (1UL << 2)
>
> KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID is actually an internal symbol, not used by
> userspace. Please move it to kvm_host.h.
>
> I see that we don't check flags for validity. Please add a check that
> we don't use undefined flags and return -EINVAL. Should be a separate
> patch since we may want to backport it.
>
Okay, will do.
> We need a KVM_CAP_ so userspace knows it can use the feature. Only x86
> should respond to it now, until (or if) other archs are updated.
>
Right.
>>
>> +static bool vma_is_avalid(struct vm_area_struct *vma, bool write_fault)
>
> s/avalid/valid/.
Oops, thanks for you pointing it out.
>
>> +{
>> + if (write_fault) {
>> + if (unlikely(!(vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)))
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + return true;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (unlikely(!(vma->vm_flags & (VM_READ | VM_EXEC | VM_WRITE))))
>> + return false;
>> +
>
> Strange check. VM_EXEC doesn't concern us at all. Maybe we should
> check for VM_READ always, and VM_WRITE for write faults.
>
I do not know if some process's vma only has VM_EXTC that hopes to
protect the text/stack section, and we want to map the text section
to guest for writing test case.
But i do not have strong opinion about it, since checking VM_READ
works fine for my test case.
I will remove the VM_EXEC in the next version.
>> + return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> static pfn_t hva_to_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long addr, bool atomic,
>> bool *async, bool write_fault, bool *writable)
>> {
>> @@ -1076,7 +1103,6 @@ static pfn_t hva_to_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long
>> addr, bool atomic,
>>
>> if (writable)
>> *writable = write_fault;
>> -
>> if (async) {
>> down_read(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
>> npages = get_user_page_nowait(current, current->mm,
>> @@ -1123,8 +1149,9 @@ static pfn_t hva_to_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long
>> addr, bool atomic,
>> vma->vm_pgoff;
>> BUG_ON(!kvm_is_mmio_pfn(pfn));
>> } else {
>> - if (async && (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE))
>> + if (async && vma_is_avalid(vma, write_fault))
>> *async = true;
>> +
>
>
> This checks based on the fault type, not memslot type. So we have the
> risk of the pfn later used for writes?
>
Yes, but we can not export hva_to_pfn which is only allowed to be used in
kvm_main.c. (it is only the help function for gfn_to_pfn_*().)
>> pfn = get_fault_pfn();
>> }
>> up_read(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
>> @@ -1148,7 +1175,7 @@ static pfn_t __gfn_to_pfn(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn,
>> bool atomic, bool *async,
>> if (async)
>> *async = false;
>>
>> - addr = gfn_to_hva(kvm, gfn);
>> + addr = gfn_to_hva_prot(kvm, gfn, write_fault);
>> if (kvm_is_error_hva(addr)) {
>> get_page(bad_page);
>> return page_to_pfn(bad_page);
>> @@ -1293,7 +1320,7 @@ int kvm_read_guest_page(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn,
>> void *data, int offset,
>> int r;
>> unsigned long addr;
>>
>> - addr = gfn_to_hva(kvm, gfn);
>> + addr = gfn_to_hva_prot(kvm, gfn, false);
>> if (kvm_is_error_hva(addr))
>> return -EFAULT;
>> r = __copy_from_user(data, (void __user *)addr + offset, len);
>> @@ -1331,7 +1358,7 @@ int kvm_read_guest_atomic(struct kvm *kvm, gpa_t gpa,
>> void *data,
>> gfn_t gfn = gpa >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>> int offset = offset_in_page(gpa);
>>
>> - addr = gfn_to_hva(kvm, gfn);
>> + addr = gfn_to_hva_prot(kvm, gfn, false);
>> if (kvm_is_error_hva(addr))
>> return -EFAULT;
>> pagefault_disable();
>
> Surprised only those places.
>
> How do we make sure a pfn obtained with write = false isn't later used
> for writing?
Ah, i think it is hard to ensure it.
May be we can introduce two APIs:
- gfn_to_pfn_read(), kvm_read_gfn()
- gfn_to_pfn_write(), kvm_write_pfn()
They should be paired together by the developer.
By the way, a foolish question, what is ROMD? i did not find any explanation
on google.
--
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
