Hi Sean,
Thank you for writing this, it explains exactly what I wanted to know.
On 7/20/21 9:33 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> I just can't figure out why having the mmap lock is not needed to walk the
>> userspace page tables. Any hints? Or am I not seeing where it's taken?
> Disclaimer: I'm not super familiar with arm64's page tables, but the relevant
> KVM
> functionality is common across x86 and arm64.
>
> KVM arm64 (and x86) unconditionally registers a mmu_notifier for the mm_struct
> associated with the VM, and disallows calling ioctls from a different process,
> i.e. walking the page tables during KVM_RUN is guaranteed to use the mm for
> which
> KVM registered the mmu_notifier. As part of registration, the mmu_notifier
> does mmgrab() and doesn't do mmdrop() until it's unregistered. That ensures
> the
> mm_struct itself is live.
>
> For the page tables liveliness, KVM implements mmu_notifier_ops.release,
> which is
> invoked at the beginning of exit_mmap(), before the page tables are freed. In
> its implementation, KVM takes mmu_lock and zaps all its shadow page tables,
> a.k.a.
> the stage2 tables in KVM arm64. The flow in question,
> get_user_mapping_size(),
> also runs under mmu_lock, and so effectively blocks exit_mmap() and thus is
> guaranteed to run with live userspace tables.
>
> Lastly, KVM also implements mmu_notifier_ops.invalidate_range_{start,end}.
> KVM's
> invalidate_range implementations also take mmu_lock, and also update a
> sequence
> counter and a flag stating that there's an invalidation in progress. When
> installing a stage2 entry, KVM snapshots the sequence counter before taking
> mmu_lock, and then checks it again after acquiring mmu_lock. If the counter
> mismatches, or an invalidation is in-progress, then KVM bails and resumes the
> guest without fixing the fault.
>
> E.g. if the host zaps userspace page tables and KVM "wins" the race, the
> subsequent
> kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() will zap the recently installed
> stage2
> entries. And if the host zap "wins" the race, KVM will resume the guest,
> which
> in normal operation will hit the exception again and go back through the
> entire
> process of installing stage2 entries.
>
> Looking at the arm64 code, one thing I'm not clear on is whether arm64
> correctly
> handles the case where exit_mmap() wins the race. The invalidate_range hooks
> will
> still be called, so userspace page tables aren't a problem, but
> kvm_arch_flush_shadow_all() -> kvm_free_stage2_pgd() nullifies mmu->pgt
> without
> any additional notifications that I see. x86 deals with this by ensuring its
> top-level TDP entry (stage2 equivalent) is valid while the page fault handler
> is
> running.
>
> void kvm_free_stage2_pgd(struct kvm_s2_mmu *mmu)
> {
> struct kvm *kvm = kvm_s2_mmu_to_kvm(mmu);
> struct kvm_pgtable *pgt = NULL;
>
> spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
> pgt = mmu->pgt;
> if (pgt) {
> mmu->pgd_phys = 0;
> mmu->pgt = NULL;
> free_percpu(mmu->last_vcpu_ran);
> }
> spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>
> ...
> }
>
> AFAICT, nothing in user_mem_abort() would prevent consuming that null mmu->pgt
> if exit_mmap() collidied with user_mem_abort().
>
> static int user_mem_abort(...)
> {
>
> ...
>
> spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
> pgt = vcpu->arch.hw_mmu->pgt; <-- hw_mmu->pgt may be NULL
> (hw_mmu points at vcpu->kvm->arch.mmu)
> if (mmu_notifier_retry(kvm, mmu_seq)) <-- mmu_seq not guaranteed to
> change
> goto out_unlock;
>
> ...
>
> if (fault_status == FSC_PERM && vma_pagesize == fault_granule) {
> ret = kvm_pgtable_stage2_relax_perms(pgt, fault_ipa, prot);
> } else {
> ret = kvm_pgtable_stage2_map(pgt, fault_ipa, vma_pagesize,
> __pfn_to_phys(pfn), prot,
> memcache);
> }
> }
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
