On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 8:40 PM Sean Christopherson
<sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 01:08:22PM -0700, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 1:13 AM Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > ---
> > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 12 +++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > index 3aba51d782e2..39a5dde12b79 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > @@ -2257,10 +2257,6 @@ static int hardware_enable(void)
> > > !hv_get_vp_assist_page(cpu))
> > > return -EFAULT;
> > >
> > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&per_cpu(loaded_vmcss_on_cpu, cpu));
> > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu, cpu));
> > > - spin_lock_init(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, cpu));
> > > -
> > > r = kvm_cpu_vmxon(phys_addr);
> > > if (r)
> > > return r;
> > > @@ -8006,7 +8002,7 @@ module_exit(vmx_exit);
> > >
> > > static int __init vmx_init(void)
> > > {
> > > - int r;
> > > + int r, cpu;
> > >
> > > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV)
> > > /*
> > > @@ -8060,6 +8056,12 @@ static int __init vmx_init(void)
> > > return r;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&per_cpu(loaded_vmcss_on_cpu, cpu));
> > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu, cpu));
> > > + spin_lock_init(&per_cpu(blocked_vcpu_on_cpu_lock, cpu));
> > > + }
> >
> > Just above this chunk, we have:
> >
> > r = vmx_setup_l1d_flush(vmentry_l1d_flush_param);
> > if (r) {
> > vmx_exit();
> > ...
> >
> > If we take that early exit, because vmx_setup_l1d_flush() fails, we
> > won't initialize loaded_vmcss_on_cpu. However, vmx_exit() calls
> > kvm_exit(), which calls on_each_cpu(hardware_disable_nolock, NULL, 1).
> > Hardware_disable_nolock() then calls kvm_arch_hardware_disable(),
> > which calls kvm_x86_ops.hardware_disable() [the vmx.c
> > hardware_disable()], which calls vmclear_local_loaded_vmcss().
> >
> > I believe that vmclear_local_loaded_vmcss() will then try to
> > dereference a NULL pointer, since per_cpu(loaded_vmcss_on_cpu, cpu) is
> > uninitialzed.
>
> I agree the code is a mess (kvm_init() and kvm_exit() included), but I'm
> pretty sure hardware_disable_nolock() is guaranteed to be a nop as it's
> impossible for kvm_usage_count to be non-zero if vmx_init() hasn't
> finished.
Unless I'm missing something, there's no check for a non-zero
kvm_usage_count on this path. There is such a check in
hardware_disable_all_nolock(), but not in hardware_disable_nolock().
