On Fri, Jul 15, 2022, Yu Zhang wrote: > Although EB.PF in vmcs02 is still set by simply "or"ing the EB of > vmcs01 and vmcs12, the explanation is obsolete. "enable_ept" being > set is not the only reason for L0 to clear its EB.PF. > > Signed-off-by: Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c > index 778f82015f03..634a7d218048 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c > @@ -2451,10 +2451,10 @@ static void prepare_vmcs02_rare(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12) > * is not easy (if at all possible?) to merge L0 and L1's desires, we > * simply ask to exit on each and every L2 page fault. This is done by > * setting MASK=MATCH=0 and (see below) EB.PF=1. > - * Note that below we don't need special code to set EB.PF beyond the > - * "or"ing of the EB of vmcs01 and vmcs12, because when enable_ept, > - * vmcs01's EB.PF is 0 so the "or" will take vmcs12's value, and when > - * !enable_ept, EB.PF is 1, so the "or" will always be 1. > + * Note that EB.PF is set by "or"ing of the EB of vmcs01 and vmcs12, > + * because when L0 has no desire to intercept #PF, vmcs01's EB.PF is 0 > + * so the "or" will take vmcs12's value, otherwise EB.PF is 1, so the > + * "or" will always be 1. Oof! I was going to respond with a variety of nits (about the existing comment), and even suggest that we address the TODO just out of sight, but looking at all of this made me realize there's a bug here! vmx_update_exception_bitmap() doesn't update MASK and MATCH! Hitting the bug is extremely unlikely, as it would require changing the guest's MAXPHYADDR via KVM_SET_CPUID2 _after_ KVM_SET_NESTED_STATE, but before KVM_RUN (because KVM now disallows changin CPUID after KVM_RUN). During KVM_SET_CPUID2, KVM will invoke vmx_update_exception_bitmap() to refresh the exception bitmap to handle the ept=1 && allow_smaller_maxphyaddr=1 scenario. But when L2 is active, vmx_update_exception_bitmap() assumes vmcs02 already has the correct MASK+MATCH because of the "clear both if KVM and L1 both want #PF" behavior. But if KVM's desire to intercept #PF changes from 0=>1, then KVM will run L2 with the MASK+MATCH from vmcs12 because vmx_need_pf_intercept() would have returned false at the time of prepare_vmcs02_rare(). Fixing the bug is fairly straightforward, and presents a good opportunity to clean up the code (and this comment) and address the TODO. Unless someone objects to my suggestion for patch 01, can you send a new version of patch 01? I'll send a separate series to fix this theoretical bug, avoid writing MASK+MATCH when vmcs0x.EXCEPTION_BITMAP.PF+0, and to address the TODO. E.g. I believe this is what we want to end up with: if (vmcs12) eb |= vmcs12->exception_bitmap; /* * #PF is conditionally intercepted based on the #PF error code (PFEC) * combined with the exception bitmap. #PF is intercept if: * * EXCEPTION_BITMAP.PF=1 && ((PFEC & MASK) == MATCH). * * If any #PF is being intercepted, update MASK+MATCH, otherwise leave * them alone they do not affect interception (EXCEPTION_BITMAP.PF=0). */ if (eb & (1u << PF_VECTOR)) { /* * If EPT is enabled, #PF is only intercepted if MAXPHYADDR is * smaller on the guest than on the host. In that case, KVM * only needs to intercept present, non-reserved #PF. If EPT * is disabled, i.e. KVM is using shadow paging, KVM needs to * intercept all #PF. Note, whether or not KVM wants to * intercept _any_ #PF is handled below. */ if (enable_ept) { pfec_mask = PFERR_PRESENT_MASK | PFERR_RSVD_MASK; pfec_match = PFERR_PRESENT_MASK; } else { pfec_mask = 0; pfec_match = 0; } if (!(vmcs12->exception_bitmap & (1u << PF_VECTOR))) { /* L1 doesn't want to intercept #PF, use KVM's MASK+MATCH. */ } else if (!kvm_needs_pf_intercept) { /* KVM doesn't want to intercept #PF, use L1's MASK+MATCH. */ pfec_mask = vmcs12->page_fault_error_code_mask; pfec_match = vmcs12->page_fault_error_code_match; } else if (pfec_mask != vmcs12->page_fault_error_code_mask || pfec_match != vmcs12->page_fault_error_code_mask) { /* * KVM and L1 want to intercept #PF with different MASK * and/or MATCH. For simplicity, intercept all #PF by * clearing MASK+MATCH. Merging KVM's and L1's desires * is quite complex, while the odds of meaningfully * reducing what #PFs are intercept are low. */ pfec_mask = 0; pfec_match = 0; } else { /* KVM and L1 have identical MASK+MATCH. */ } vmcs_write32(PAGE_FAULT_ERROR_CODE_MASK, pfec_mask); vmcs_write32(PAGE_FAULT_ERROR_CODE_MATCH, pfec_match); }