On Wed, Dec 14, 2022, Robert Hoo wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-12-13 at 03:30 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> > index e2e197d41780..fd4ae99790d7 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
> > @@ -1203,7 +1203,8 @@ int kvm_tdp_mmu_map(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > struct kvm_page_fault *fault)
> > if (fault->huge_page_disallowed &&
> > fault->req_level >= iter.level) {
> > spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> > - track_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
> > + if (sp->nx_huge_page_disallowed)
> > + track_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
> > spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
> > }
> > }
>
> Is this possible?
> The aforementioned situation happened, i.e. before above hunk
> track_possible_nx_huge_page(), the sp is zapped by some other task,
> tdp_mmu_unlink_sp() --> untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp):
It's possible for untrack_possible_nx_huge_page() to be called before the above
snippet, but the stat won't be decremented in that case since the page won't be on
the list of possible NX huge pages, i.e. list_empty() will be true.
void untrack_possible_nx_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
{
if (list_empty(&sp->possible_nx_huge_page_link))
return;
--kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
And by not calling track_possible_nx_huge_page() (this bug fix), nx_lpage_splits
won't be incorrectly incremented.
>
> --kvm->stat.nx_lpage_splits;
>
> But looks like the stat for this sp hasn't been increased yet.
>
