On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:00:35PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Hi Ricardo, > > (adding [email protected] to CC because the email this is a reply to got > rejected because of html content) > > On 9/14/21 04:20, Ricardo Koller wrote: > > Hi Alexandru, Eric, > > > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 11:15:33AM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > >> Hi Eric, Ricardo, > >> > >> On 9/10/21 20:32, Ricardo Koller wrote: > >>> Hi Alexandru and Eric, > >>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:42:23AM +0200, Eric Auger wrote: > >>>> Hi Alexandru, > >>>> > >>>> On 9/10/21 10:28 AM, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > >>>>> Hi Ricardo, > >>>>> > >>>>> On 9/9/21 5:47 PM, Ricardo Koller wrote: > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 11:20:15AM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi Ricardo, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 9/8/21 10:03 PM, Ricardo Koller wrote: > >>>>>>>> Extend vgic_v3_check_base() to verify that the redistributor regions > >>>>>>>> don't go above the VM-specified IPA size (phys_size). This can happen > >>>>>>>> when using the legacy KVM_VGIC_V3_ADDR_TYPE_REDIST attribute with: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> base + size > phys_size AND base < phys_size > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> vgic_v3_check_base() is used to check the redist regions bases when > >>>>>>>> setting them (with the vcpus added so far) and when attempting the > >>>>>>>> first > >>>>>>>> vcpu-run. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 4 ++++ > >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > >>>>>>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > >>>>>>>> index 66004f61cd83..5afd9f6f68f6 100644 > >>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > >>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > >>>>>>>> @@ -512,6 +512,10 @@ bool vgic_v3_check_base(struct kvm *kvm) > >>>>>>>> if (rdreg->base + vgic_v3_rd_region_size(kvm, rdreg) < > >>>>>>>> rdreg->base) > >>>>>>>> return false; > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> + if (rdreg->base + vgic_v3_rd_region_size(kvm, rdreg) > > >>>>>>>> + kvm_phys_size(kvm)) > >>>>>>>> + return false; > >>>>>>> Looks to me like this same check (and the overflow one before it) is > >>>>>>> done when > >>>>>>> adding a new Redistributor region in kvm_vgic_addr() -> > >>>>>>> vgic_v3_set_redist_base() > >>>>>>> -> vgic_v3_alloc_redist_region() -> vgic_check_ioaddr(). As far as I > >>>>>>> can tell, > >>>>>>> kvm_vgic_addr() handles both ways of setting the Redistributor > >>>>>>> address. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Without this patch, did you manage to set a base address such that > >>>>>>> base + size > > >>>>>>> kvm_phys_size()? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, with the KVM_VGIC_V3_ADDR_TYPE_REDIST legacy API. The easiest way > >>>>>> to get to this situation is with the selftest in patch 2. I then tried > >>>>>> an extra experiment: map the first redistributor, run the first vcpu, > >>>>>> and access the redist from inside the guest. KVM didn't complain in any > >>>>>> of these steps. > >>>>> Yes, Eric pointed out that I was mistaken and there is no check being > >>>>> done for > >>>>> base + size > kvm_phys_size(). > >>>>> > >>>>> What I was trying to say is that this check is better done when the > >>>>> user creates a > >>>>> Redistributor region, not when a VCPU is first run. We have everything > >>>>> we need to > >>>>> make the check when a region is created, why wait until the VCPU is run? > >>>>> > >>>>> For example, vgic_v3_insert_redist_region() is called each time the > >>>>> adds a new > >>>>> Redistributor region (via either of the two APIs), and already has a > >>>>> check for the > >>>>> upper limit overflowing (identical to the check in > >>>>> vgic_v3_check_base()). I would > >>>>> add the check against the maximum IPA size there. > >>>> you seem to refer to an old kernel as vgic_v3_insert_redist_region was > >>>> renamed into� vgic_v3_alloc_redist_region in > >>>> e5a35635464b kvm: arm64: vgic-v3: Introduce vgic_v3_free_redist_region() > >>>> > >>>> I think in case you use the old rdist API you do not know yet the size > >>>> of the redist region at this point (count=0), hence Ricardo's choice to > >>>> do the check latter. > >>> Just wanted to add one more detail. vgic_v3_check_base() is also called > >>> when creating the redistributor region (via vgic_v3_set_redist_base -> > >>> vgic_register_redist_iodev). This patch reuses that check for the old > >>> redist API to also check for "base + size > kvm_phys_size()" with a size > >>> calculated using the vcpus added so far. > >> @Eric: Indeed I was looking at an older kernel by mistake, thank you for > >> pointing > >> that out! > >> > >> Thank you both for the explanations, the piece I was missing was the fact > >> that > >> KVM_VGIC_V3_ADDR_TYPE_REDIST specifies only the base address and the limit > >> for the > >> region is the number of VCPUs * (KVM_VGIC_V3_REDIST_SIZE = 128K), which > >> makes it > >> necessary to have the check when each VCPU is first run (as far as I can > >> tell, > >> VCPUs can be created at any time). > >> > >>>>> Also, because vgic_v3_insert_redist_region() already checks for > >>>>> overflow, I > >>>>> believe the overflow check in vgic_v3_check_base() is redundant. > >>>>> > >>> It's redundant for the new redist API, but still needed for the old > >>> redist API. > >> Indeed. > >> > >>>>> As far as I can tell, vgic_v3_check_base() is there to make sure that > >>>>> the > >>>>> Distributor doesn't overlap with any of the Redistributors, and because > >>>>> the > >>>>> Redistributors and the Distributor can be created in any order, we > >>>>> defer the check > >>>>> until the first VCPU is run. I might be wrong about this, someone > >>>>> please correct > >>>>> me if I'm wrong. > >>>>> > >>>>> Also, did you verify that KVM is also doing this check for GICv2? KVM > >>>>> does > >>>>> something similar and calls vgic_v2_check_base() when mapping the GIC > >>>>> resources, > >>>>> and I don't see a check for the maximum IPA size in that function > >>>>> either. > >>>> I think vgic_check_ioaddr() called in kvm_vgic_addr() does the job (it > >>>> checks the base @) > >>>> > >>> It seems that GICv2 suffers from the same problem. The cpu interface > >>> base is checked but the end can extend above IPA size. Note that the cpu > >>> interface is 8KBs and vgic_check_ioaddr() is only checking that its base > >> ... except that the doc for KVM_VGIC_V2_ADDR_TYPE_CPU says that the CPU > >> interface > >> region is 4K, while the check in vgic_v2_check_base() is done against > >> KVM_VGIC_V2_CPU_SIZE, which is 8K. > > The "GIC virtual CPU interface" alone is slightly more than 4K: GICV_DIR > > is at 0x1000. The documentation might need to be updated. > > > >> I suppose that the CPU interface region is 8K > >> because ARM IHI 0048B.b strongly recommends that the virtual CPU interface > >> control > >> registers are in a separate 4KB region, and KVM wants to emulate a GICv2 > >> as close > >> to the real thing as possible? > > Are the "virtual CPU interface control" registers the ones starting with > > GICH_? If yes, then I'm a bit confused, as those are not exposed to the > > guest (to my knowledge). > > Yes, those are the ones, and I also did find that they are not exposed to the > guest. > > Comparing the KVM documentation with what KVM actually does, I assumed that > the > 8KB was a forward looking decision, in case nested virtualization will support > GICv2, which means that the GICH_* registers would also have to be exposed. > Making > the CPU interface for a CPU 8KB from the start would avoid changes or > additions to > the API if that happens. > > However, after further digging through the spec, I found that the virtual CPU > interface is specified to be 8KB (Table 5-10 of ARM IHI 0048B.b). I think > that's > the reason KVM treats it as 8KB.
Thanks for checking Alexandru. Will send a commit to update the documentation as well then (v3). Regards, Ricardo > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > > >>> is 4KB aligned and below IPA size. The distributor region is 4KB so > >>> vgic_check_ioaddr() is enough in that case. > >>> > >>> What about the following? > >>> > >>> I can work on the next version of this patch (v2 has the GICv2 issue) > >>> which adds vgic_check_range(), which is like vgic_check_ioaddr() but > >>> with a size arg. kvm_vgic_addr() can then call vgic_check_range() and > >>> do all the checks for GICv2 and GICv3. Note that for GICv2, there's no > >>> need to wait until first vcpu run to do the check. Also note that I will > >>> have to keep the change in vgic_v3_check_base() to check for the old v3 > >>> redist API at first vcpu run. > >> Sounds good. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Ricardo > >>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> > >>>> Eric > > Will do, thank you both. > > > > Ricardo > > > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> > >>>>> Alex > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> Ricardo > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Alex > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> } > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> if (IS_VGIC_ADDR_UNDEF(d->vgic_dist_base)) _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
