On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 10:36:09AM -0700, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:51 AM Sean Christopherson
> <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On successful nested VM-Enter, check for pending interrupts and convert
> > the highest priority interrupt to a pending posted interrupt if it
> > matches L2's notification vector. If the vCPU receives a notification
> > interrupt before nested VM-Enter (assuming L1 disables IRQs before doing
> > VM-Enter), the pending interrupt (for L1) should be recognized and
> > processed as a posted interrupt when interrupts become unblocked after
> > VM-Enter to L2.
> >
> > This fixes a bug where L1/L2 will get stuck in an infinite loop if L1 is
> > trying to inject an interrupt into L2 by setting the appropriate bit in
> > L2's PIR and sending a self-IPI prior to VM-Enter (as opposed to KVM's
> > method of manually moving the vector from PIR->vIRR/RVI). KVM will
> > observe the IPI while the vCPU is in L1 context and so won't immediately
> > morph it to a posted interrupt for L2. The pending interrupt will be
> > seen by vmx_check_nested_events(), cause KVM to force an immediate exit
> > after nested VM-Enter, and eventually be reflected to L1 as a VM-Exit.
> > After handling the VM-Exit, L1 will see that L2 has a pending interrupt
> > in PIR, send another IPI, and repeat until L2 is killed.
> >
> > Note, posted interrupts require virtual interrupt deliveriy, and virtual
> > interrupt delivery requires exit-on-interrupt, ergo interrupts will be
> > unconditionally unmasked on VM-Enter if posted interrupts are enabled.
> >
> > Fixes: 705699a13994 ("KVM: nVMX: Enable nested posted interrupt processing")
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Liran Alon <liran.alon@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> I don't think this is the best fix.
I agree, even without any more explanantion :-)
> I believe the real problem is the way that external and posted
> interrupts are handled in vmx_check_nested_events().
>
> First of all, I believe that the existing call to
> vmx_complete_nested_posted_interrupt() at the end of
> vmx_check_nested_events() is far too aggressive. Unless I am missing
> something in the SDM, posted interrupt processing is *only* triggered
> when the notification vector is received in VMX non-root mode. It is
> not triggered on VM-entry.
That's my understanding as well. Virtual interrupt delivery is evaluated
on VM-Enter, but not posted interrupts.
Evaluation of pending virtual interrupts is caused only by VM entry, TPR
virtualization, EOI virtualization, self-IPI virtualization, and posted-
interrupt processing.
> Looking back one block, we have:
>
> if (kvm_cpu_has_interrupt(vcpu) && !vmx_interrupt_blocked(vcpu)) {
> if (block_nested_events)
> return -EBUSY;
> if (!nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu))
> goto no_vmexit;
> nested_vmx_vmexit(vcpu, EXIT_REASON_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT, 0, 0);
> return 0;
> }
>
> If nested_exit_on_intr() is true, we should first check to see if
> "acknowledge interrupt on exit" is set. If so, we should acknowledge
> the interrupt right here, with a call to kvm_cpu_get_interrupt(),
> rather than deep in the guts of nested_vmx_vmexit(). If the vector we
> get is the notification vector from VMCS12, then we should call
> vmx_complete_nested_posted_interrupt(). Otherwise, we should call
> nested_vmx_vmexit(EXIT_REASON_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT) as we do now.
That makes sense. And we can pass in exit_intr_info instead of computing
it in nested_vmx_vmexit() since this is the only path that does a nested
exit with EXIT_REASON_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT.
> Furthermore, vmx_complete_nested_posted_interrupt() should write to
> the L1 EOI register, as indicated in step 4 of the 7-step sequence
> detailed in section 29.6 of the SDM, volume 3. It skips this step
> today.
Yar.
Thanks Jim! I'll get a series out.
