On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 11:32:27AM +0000, Beata Michalska wrote:
> Injecting external data abort through KVM might trigger
> an issue on kernels that do not get updated to include the KVM fix.
> For those and aarch32 guests, the injected abort gets misconfigured
> to be an implementation defined exception. This leads to the guest
> repeatedly re-running the faulting instruction.
>
> Add support for handling that case.
> [
> Fixed-by: 018f22f95e8a
> ('KVM: arm: Fix DFSR setting for non-LPAE aarch32 guests')
> Fixed-by: 21aecdbd7f3a
> ('KVM: arm: Make inject_abt32() inject an external abort instead')
> ]
>
> Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> target/arm/cpu.h | 1 +
> target/arm/kvm.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> target/arm/kvm32.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> target/arm/kvm64.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> target/arm/kvm_arm.h | 10 ++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.h b/target/arm/cpu.h
> index 4f834c1..868afc6 100644
> --- a/target/arm/cpu.h
> +++ b/target/arm/cpu.h
> @@ -561,6 +561,7 @@ typedef struct CPUARMState {
> } serror;
>
> uint8_t ext_dabt_pending; /* Request for injecting ext DABT */
> + uint8_t ext_dabt_raised; /* Tracking/verifying injection of ext DABT */
>
> /* State of our input IRQ/FIQ/VIRQ/VFIQ lines */
> uint32_t irq_line_state;
> diff --git a/target/arm/kvm.c b/target/arm/kvm.c
> index c088589..58ad734 100644
> --- a/target/arm/kvm.c
> +++ b/target/arm/kvm.c
> @@ -721,7 +721,12 @@ int kvm_put_vcpu_events(ARMCPU *cpu)
> ret = kvm_vcpu_ioctl(CPU(cpu), KVM_SET_VCPU_EVENTS, &events);
> if (ret) {
> error_report("failed to put vcpu events");
> - } else {
> + } else if (env->ext_dabt_pending) {
> + /*
> + * Mark that the external DABT has been injected,
> + * if one has been requested
> + */
> + env->ext_dabt_raised = env->ext_dabt_pending;
> /* Clear instantly if the call was successful */
> env->ext_dabt_pending = 0;
> }
> @@ -755,6 +760,29 @@ int kvm_get_vcpu_events(ARMCPU *cpu)
>
> void kvm_arch_pre_run(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run)
> {
> + ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(cs);
> + CPUARMState *env = &cpu->env;
> +
> + if (unlikely(env->ext_dabt_raised)) {
> + /*
> + * Verifying that the ext DABT has been properly injected,
> + * otherwise risking indefinitely re-running the faulting instruction
> + * Covering a very narrow case for kernels 5.5..5.5.4
> + * when injected abort was misconfigured to be
> + * an IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED exception (for 32-bit EL1)
> + */
> + if (!arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_AARCH64) &&
> + unlikely(!kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending(cs))) {
> +
> + error_report("Data abort exception with no valid ISS generated by "
> + "guest memory access. KVM unable to emulate faulting "
> + "instruction. Failed to inject an external data abort "
> + "into the guest.");
> + abort();
> + }
> + /* Clear the status */
> + env->ext_dabt_raised = 0;
> + }
> }
>
> MemTxAttrs kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run)
> diff --git a/target/arm/kvm32.c b/target/arm/kvm32.c
> index f271181..86c4fe7 100644
> --- a/target/arm/kvm32.c
> +++ b/target/arm/kvm32.c
> @@ -564,3 +564,28 @@ void kvm_arm_pmu_init(CPUState *cs)
> {
> qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, "%s: not implemented\n", __func__);
> }
> +
> +#define ARM_REG_DFSR ARM_CP15_REG32(0, 5, 0, 0)
> +#define ARM_REG_TTBCR ARM_CP15_REG32(0, 2, 0, 2)
> +
> +#define DFSR_FSC(v) (((v) >> 6 | (v)) & 0x1F)
> +#define DFSC_EXTABT(lpae) (lpae) ? 0x10 : 0x08
We should put () around the whole ?: expression when it's in a macro
> +
> +bool kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending(CPUState *cs)
> +{
> + uint32_t dfsr_val;
> +
> + if (!kvm_get_one_reg(cs, ARM_REG_DFSR, &dfsr_val)) {
> + ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(cs);
> + CPUARMState *env = &cpu->env;
> + uint32_t ttbcr;
> + int lpae = 0;
> +
> + if (!kvm_get_one_reg(cs, ARM_REG_TTBCR, &ttbcr)) {
> + lpae = arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_LPAE) && (ttbcr & TTBCR_EAE);
> + }
> + return !(DFSR_FSC(dfsr_val) != DFSC_EXTABT(lpae));
!(a != b) is a convoluted way to write a == b
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> diff --git a/target/arm/kvm64.c b/target/arm/kvm64.c
> index be5b31c..18594e9 100644
> --- a/target/arm/kvm64.c
> +++ b/target/arm/kvm64.c
> @@ -1430,3 +1430,37 @@ bool kvm_arm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_debug_exit_arch *debug_exit)
>
> return false;
> }
> +
> +#define ARM64_REG_ESR_EL1 ARM64_SYS_REG(3, 0, 5, 2, 0)
> +#define ARM64_REG_TCR_EL1 ARM64_SYS_REG(3, 0, 2, 0, 2)
> +
> +#define ESR_DFSC(aarch64, v) \
> + ((aarch64) ? ((v) & 0x3F) \
> + : (((v) >> 6 | (v)) & 0x1F))
> +
> +#define ESR_DFSC_EXTABT(aarch64, lpae) \
> + ((aarch64) ? 0x10 : (lpae) ? 0x10 : 0x8)
> +
> +bool kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending(CPUState *cs)
> +{
> + uint64_t dfsr_val;
> +
> + if (!kvm_get_one_reg(cs, ARM64_REG_ESR_EL1, &dfsr_val)) {
> + ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(cs);
> + CPUARMState *env = &cpu->env;
> + int aarch64_mode = arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_AARCH64);
> + int lpae = 0;
> +
> + if (!aarch64_mode) {
> + uint64_t ttbcr;
> +
> + if (!kvm_get_one_reg(cs, ARM64_REG_TCR_EL1, &ttbcr)) {
> + lpae = arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_LPAE)
> + && (ttbcr & TTBCR_EAE);
> + }
> + }
> + return !(ESR_DFSC(aarch64_mode, dfsr_val) !=
> + ESR_DFSC_EXTABT(aarch64_mode, lpae));
a == b, please
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> diff --git a/target/arm/kvm_arm.h b/target/arm/kvm_arm.h
> index 39472d5..f2dc6a2 100644
> --- a/target/arm/kvm_arm.h
> +++ b/target/arm/kvm_arm.h
> @@ -461,6 +461,16 @@ void kvm_arm_copy_hw_debug_data(struct kvm_guest_debug_arch *ptr);
> int kvm_arm_handle_dabt_nisv(CPUState *cs, uint64_t esr_iss,
> uint64_t fault_ipa);
> /**
> + * kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending:
> + * @cs: CPUState
> + *
> + * Verify the fault status code wrt the Ext DABT injection
> + *
> + * Returns: true if the fault status code is as expected, false otherwise
> + */
> +bool kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending(CPUState *cs);
> +
> +/**
> * its_class_name:
> *
> * Return the ITS class name to use depending on whether KVM acceleration
> --
> 2.7.4
>
>
I'll leave the decision to take this KVM bug workaround patch at all to Peter,
and I didn't actually review whether or not kvm_arm_verify_ext_dabt_pending
is doing what it claims it's doing, so I'm reluctant to give an r-b on
this patch. But, as far as the code goes, besides the comments above, it
looks fine to me.
Thanks,
drew
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
