Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: VMX: Enable Notify VM exit

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/26/2022 12:53 PM, Jim Mattson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 8:25 PM Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 8:07 PM Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2/25/2022 11:13 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 2/25/22 16:12, Xiaoyao Li wrote:


I don't like the idea of making things up without notifying userspace
that this is fictional. How is my customer running nested VMs supposed
to know that L2 didn't actually shutdown, but L0 killed it because the
notify window was exceeded? If this information isn't reported to
userspace, I have no way of getting the information to the customer.

Then, maybe a dedicated software define VM exit for it instead of
reusing triple fault?


Second thought, we can even just return Notify VM exit to L1 to tell
L2 causes Notify VM exit, even thought Notify VM exit is not exposed
to L1.

That might cause NULL pointer dereferences or other nasty occurrences.

IMO, a well written VMM (in L1) should handle it correctly.

L0 KVM reports no Notify VM Exit support to L1, so L1 runs without
setting Notify VM exit. If a L2 causes notify_vm_exit with
invalid_vm_context, L0 just reflects it to L1. In L1's view, there is no
support of Notify VM Exit from VMX MSR capability. Following L1 handler
is possible:

a)      if (notify_vm_exit available & notify_vm_exit enabled) {
                 handle in b)
         } else {
                 report unexpected vm exit reason to userspace;
         }

b)      similar handler like we implement in KVM:
         if (!vm_context_invalid)
                 re-enter guest;
         else
                 report to userspace;

c)      no Notify VM Exit related code (e.g. old KVM), it's treated as
unsupported exit reason

As long as it belongs to any case above, I think L1 can handle it
correctly. Any nasty occurrence should be caused by incorrect handler in
L1 VMM, in my opinion.

Please test some common hypervisors (e.g. ESXi and Hyper-V).

I took a look at KVM in Linux v4.9 (one of our more popular guests),
and it will not handle this case well:

         if (exit_reason < kvm_vmx_max_exit_handlers
             && kvm_vmx_exit_handlers[exit_reason])
                 return kvm_vmx_exit_handlers[exit_reason](vcpu);
         else {
                 WARN_ONCE(1, "vmx: unexpected exit reason 0x%x\n", exit_reason);
                 kvm_queue_exception(vcpu, UD_VECTOR);
                 return 1;
         }

At least there's an L1 kernel log message for the first unexpected
NOTIFY VM-exit, but after that, there is silence. Just a completely
inexplicable #UD in L2, assuming that L2 is resumable at this point.

At least there is a message to tell L1 a notify VM exit is triggered in L2. Yes, the inexplicable #UD won't be hit unless L2 triggers Notify VM exit with invalid_context, which is malicious to L0 and L1.

If we use triple_fault (i.e., shutdown), then no info to tell L1 that it's caused by Notify VM exit with invalid context. Triple fault needs to be extended and L1 kernel needs to be enlightened. It doesn't help old guest kernel.

If we use Machine Check, it's somewhat same inexplicable to L2 unless it's enlightened. But it doesn't help old guest kernel.

Anyway, for Notify VM exit with invalid context from L2, I don't see a good solution to tell L1 VMM it's a "Notify VM exit with invalid context from L2" and keep all kinds of L1 VMM happy, especially for those with old kernel versions.





[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux