On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:19 PM Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Oliver,
>
> On 3/14/22 1:22 PM, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 11:19:58PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> >> KVM allows userspace to configure either all EL1 32bit or 64bit vCPUs
> >> for a guest. At vCPU reset, vcpu_allowed_register_width() checks
> >> if the vcpu's register width is consistent with all other vCPUs'.
> >> Since the checking is done even against vCPUs that are not initialized
> >> (KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT has not been done) yet, the uninitialized vCPUs
> >> are erroneously treated as 64bit vCPU, which causes the function to
> >> incorrectly detect a mixed-width VM.
> >>
> >> Introduce KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT and KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED
> >> bits for kvm->arch.flags. A value of the EL1_32BIT bit indicates that
> >> the guest needs to be configured with all 32bit or 64bit vCPUs, and
> >> a value of the REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED bit indicates if a value of the
> >> EL1_32BIT bit is valid (already set up). Values in those bits are set at
> >> the first KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT for the guest based on KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT
> >> configuration for the vCPU.
> >>
> >> Check vcpu's register width against those new bits at the vcpu's
> >> KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT (instead of against other vCPUs' register width).
> >>
> >> Fixes: 66e94d5cafd4 ("KVM: arm64: Prevent mixed-width VM creation")
> >> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Hrmph... I hate to be asking this question so late in the game, but...
> >
> > Are there any bits that we really allow variation per-vCPU besides
> > KVM_ARM_VCPU_POWER_OFF? We unintentionally allow for variance with the
> > KVM_ARM_VCPU_PSCI_0_2 bit even though that's complete nonsense.
> >
> > Stated plainly, should we just deny any attempts at asymmetry besides
> > POWER_OFF?>
> > Besides the nits, I see nothing objectionable with the patch. I'd really
> > like to see more generalized constraints on vCPU configuration, but if
> > this is the route we take:
>
> Prohibiting the mixed width configuration is not a new constraint that
> this patch creates (this patch fixes a bug that erroneously detects
> mixed-width configuration), and enforcing symmetry of other features
> among vCPUs is a bit different matter.
Right, I had managed to forget that context for a moment when I
replied to you. Then I fully agree with this patch, and the other
feature flags can be handled later.
>
> Having said that, I like the idea, which will be more consistent with
> my ID register series (it can simplify things). But, I'm not sure
> if creating the constraint for those features would be a problem for
> existing userspace even if allowing variation per-vCPU for the features
> was not our intention.
> I would guess having the constraint for KVM_ARM_VCPU_PSCI_0_2 should
> be fine. Do you think that should be fine for PMU, SVE, and PTRAUTH*
> as well ?
Personally, yes, but it prompts the question of if we could break
userspace by applying restrictions after the fact. The original patch
that applied the register width restrictions didn't cause much of a
stir, so it seems possible we could get away with it.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h | 27 ++++++++----
> >> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 9 ++++
> >> arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++----------
> >> 3 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> >> index d62405ce3e6d..7496deab025a 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> >> @@ -43,10 +43,22 @@ void kvm_inject_pabt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long addr);
> >>
> >> void kvm_vcpu_wfi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >>
> >> +#if defined(__KVM_VHE_HYPERVISOR__) || defined(__KVM_NVHE_HYPERVISOR__)
> >> static __always_inline bool vcpu_el1_is_32bit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> {
> >> return !(vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 & HCR_RW);
> >> }
> >> +#else
> >> +static __always_inline bool vcpu_el1_is_32bit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> +{
> >> + struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> >> +
> >> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!test_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED,
> >> + &kvm->arch.flags));
> >> +
> >> + return test_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT, &kvm->arch.flags);
> >> +}
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> static inline void vcpu_reset_hcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> {
> >> @@ -72,15 +84,14 @@ static inline void vcpu_reset_hcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 |= HCR_TVM;
> >> }
> >>
> >> - if (test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, vcpu->arch.features))
> >> + if (vcpu_el1_is_32bit(vcpu))
> >> vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 &= ~HCR_RW;
> >> -
> >> - /*
> >> - * TID3: trap feature register accesses that we virtualise.
> >> - * For now this is conditional, since no AArch32 feature regs
> >> - * are currently virtualised.
> >> - */
> >> - if (!vcpu_el1_is_32bit(vcpu))
> >> + else
> >> + /*
> >> + * TID3: trap feature register accesses that we virtualise.
> >> + * For now this is conditional, since no AArch32 feature regs
> >> + * are currently virtualised.
> >> + */
> >> vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 |= HCR_TID3;
> >>
> >> if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_MISMATCHED_CACHE_TYPE) ||
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >> index 11a7ae747ded..22ad977069f5 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >> @@ -125,6 +125,15 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> >> #define KVM_ARCH_FLAG_RETURN_NISV_IO_ABORT_TO_USER 0
> >> /* Memory Tagging Extension enabled for the guest */
> >> #define KVM_ARCH_FLAG_MTE_ENABLED 1
> >> + /*
> >> + * The following two bits are used to indicate the guest's EL1
> >> + * register width configuration. A value of KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT
> >> + * bit is valid only when KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED is set.
> >> + * Otherwise, the guest's EL1 register width has not yet been
> >> + * determined yet.
> >> + */
> >> +#define KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED 2
> >> +#define KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT 3
> >> unsigned long flags;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
> >> index ecc40c8cd6f6..cbeb6216ee25 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
> >> @@ -181,27 +181,45 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_enable_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> -static bool vcpu_allowed_register_width(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> +/*
> >> + * A guest can have either all EL1 32bit or 64bit vcpus only. It is
> >> + * indicated by a value of KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT bit in kvm->arch.flags,
> >> + * which is valid only when KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED in
> >> + * kvm->arch.flags is set.
> >> + * This function sets the EL1_32BIT bit based on the given @is32bit (and
> >> + * sets REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED bit). When those flags are already set,
> >> + * @is32bit must be consistent with the flags.
> >> + * Returns 0 on success, or non-zero otherwise.
> >> + */
> >
> > nit: use kerneldoc style:
> >
> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/doc-guide/kernel-doc.html
>
> Sure, I can fix the comment to use kerneldoc style.
>
>
> >
> >> +static int kvm_set_vm_width(struct kvm *kvm, bool is32bit)
> >> {
> >> - struct kvm_vcpu *tmp;
> >> - bool is32bit;
> >> - unsigned long i;
> >> + bool allowed;
> >> +
> >> + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->lock);
> >> +
> >> + if (test_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED, &kvm->arch.flags)) {
> >> + /*
> >> + * The guest's register width is already configured.
> >> + * Make sure that @is32bit is consistent with it.
> >> + */
> >> + allowed = (is32bit ==
> >> + test_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT, &kvm->arch.flags));
> >> + return allowed ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> >
> > nit: I'd avoid the ternary and just use a boring if/else (though I could
> > be in the minority here).
>
> I agree with you and will fix it.
> (The ternary with 'allowed' was just copied from the previous patch,
> and I should have changed that in this patch...)
>
> Thanks,
> Reiji
>
>
> >
> >> + }
> >>
> >> - is32bit = vcpu_has_feature(vcpu, KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT);
> >> if (!cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_32BIT_EL1) && is32bit)
> >> - return false;
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >>
> >> /* MTE is incompatible with AArch32 */
> >> - if (kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm) && is32bit)
> >> - return false;
> >> + if (kvm_has_mte(kvm) && is32bit)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >>
> >> - /* Check that the vcpus are either all 32bit or all 64bit */
> >> - kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, tmp, vcpu->kvm) {
> >> - if (vcpu_has_feature(tmp, KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT) != is32bit)
> >> - return false;
> >> - }
> >> + if (is32bit)
> >> + set_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_EL1_32BIT, &kvm->arch.flags);
> >>
> >> - return true;
> >> + set_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_REG_WIDTH_CONFIGURED, &kvm->arch.flags);
> >> +
> >> + return 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> /**
> >> @@ -230,10 +248,17 @@ int kvm_reset_vcpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> u32 pstate;
> >>
> >> mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->lock);
> >> - reset_state = vcpu->arch.reset_state;
> >> - WRITE_ONCE(vcpu->arch.reset_state.reset, false);
> >> + ret = kvm_set_vm_width(vcpu->kvm,
> >> + vcpu_has_feature(vcpu, KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT));
> >> + if (!ret) {
> >> + reset_state = vcpu->arch.reset_state;
> >> + WRITE_ONCE(vcpu->arch.reset_state.reset, false);
> >> + }
> >> mutex_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->lock);
> >>
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + return ret;
> >> +
> >> /* Reset PMU outside of the non-preemptible section */
> >> kvm_pmu_vcpu_reset(vcpu);
> >>
> >> @@ -260,14 +285,9 @@ int kvm_reset_vcpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> - if (!vcpu_allowed_register_width(vcpu)) {
> >> - ret = -EINVAL;
> >> - goto out;
> >> - }
> >> -
> >> switch (vcpu->arch.target) {
> >> default:
> >> - if (test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, vcpu->arch.features)) {
> >> + if (vcpu_el1_is_32bit(vcpu)) {
> >> pstate = VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_SVC;
> >> } else {
> >> pstate = VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_EL1;
> >> --
> >> 2.35.1.723.g4982287a31-goog
> >>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
