On Sat, May 21, 2022, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> FNAME(page_fault) verifies PDPTE for nested NPT in PAE paging mode
> because nested_svm_get_tdp_pdptr() reads the guest NPT's PDPTE from
> memory unconditionally for each call.
>
> The verifying is complicated and it works only when mmu->pae_root
> is always used when the guest is PAE paging.
Why is this relevant? It's not _that_ complicated, and even if it were, I don't
see how calling that out helps the reader understand the motivation for this patch.
> Move the verifying code in FNAME(fetch) and simplify it since the local
> shadow page is used and it can be walked in FNAME(fetch) and unlinked
> from children via drop_spte().
>
> It also allows for mmu->pae_root NOT to be used when it is NOT required
Avoid leading with pronous, "it" is ambiguous, e.g. at first I thought "it' meant
moving the code, but what "it" really means is using the iterator from the shadow
page walk instead of hardcoding a pae_root lookup.
And changing from pae_root to it.sptep needs to be explicitly called out. It's
a subtle but important detail. And if you call that out, then it's more obvious
why this patch is relevant to not having to use pae_root for a 64-bit host with NPT.
> to be put in a 32bit CR3.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> index cd6032e1947c..67c419bce1e5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> @@ -659,6 +659,39 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault,
> clear_sp_write_flooding_count(it.sptep);
> drop_large_spte(vcpu, it.sptep);
>
> + /*
> + * When nested NPT enabled and L1 is PAE paging,
> + * mmu->get_pdptrs() which is nested_svm_get_tdp_pdptr() reads
> + * the guest NPT's PDPTE from memory unconditionally for each
> + * call.
> + *
> + * The guest PAE root page is not write-protected.
> + *
> + * The mmu->get_pdptrs() in FNAME(walk_addr_generic) might get
> + * a value different from previous calls or different from the
> + * return value of mmu->get_pdptrs() in mmu_alloc_shadow_roots().
> + *
> + * It will cause the following code installs the spte in a wrong
> + * sp or links a sp to a wrong parent if the return value of
> + * mmu->get_pdptrs() is not verified unchanged since
> + * FNAME(gpte_changed) can't check this kind of change.
> + *
> + * Verify the return value of mmu->get_pdptrs() (only the gfn
> + * in it needs to be checked) and drop the spte if the gfn isn't
> + * matched.
> + *
> + * Do the verifying unconditionally when the guest is PAE
> + * paging no matter whether it is nested NPT or not to avoid
> + * complicated code.
> + */
> + if (vcpu->arch.mmu->cpu_role.base.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL &&
> + it.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL &&
> + is_shadow_present_pte(*it.sptep)) {
> + sp = to_shadow_page(*it.sptep & PT64_BASE_ADDR_MASK);
For this patch, it's probably worth a
WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->spt != vcpu->arch.mmu->pae_root);
Mostly so that when the future patch stops using pae_root for 64-bit NPT hosts,
there's a code change for this particular logic that is very much relevant to
that change.
> + if (gw->table_gfn[it.level - 2] != sp->gfn)
> + drop_spte(vcpu->kvm, it.sptep);
> + }
