On Thu, Oct 10, 2024, Yan Zhao wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 12:23:44PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Add a lockdep assertion in kvm_unmap_gfn_range() to ensure that either
> > mmu_invalidate_in_progress is elevated, or that the range is being zapped
> > due to memslot removal (loosely detected by slots_lock being held).
> > Zapping SPTEs without mmu_invalidate_{in_progress,seq} protection is unsafe
> > as KVM's page fault path snapshots state before acquiring mmu_lock, and
> > thus can create SPTEs with stale information if vCPUs aren't forced to
> > retry faults (due to seeing an in-progress or past MMU invalidation).
> >
> > Memslot removal is a special case, as the memslot is retrieved outside of
> > mmu_invalidate_seq, i.e. doesn't use the "standard" protections, and
> > instead relies on SRCU synchronization to ensure any in-flight page faults
> > are fully resolved before zapping SPTEs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > index 09494d01c38e..c6716fd3666f 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > @@ -1556,6 +1556,16 @@ bool kvm_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range)
> > {
> > bool flush = false;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * To prevent races with vCPUs faulting in a gfn using stale data,
> > + * zapping a gfn range must be protected by mmu_invalidate_in_progress
> > + * (and mmu_invalidate_seq). The only exception is memslot deletion,
> > + * in which case SRCU synchronization ensures SPTEs a zapped after all
> > + * vCPUs have unlocked SRCU and are guaranteed to see the invalid slot.
> > + */
> > + lockdep_assert_once(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress ||
> > + lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock));
> > +
> Is the detection of slots_lock too loose?
Yes, but I can't think of an easy way to tighten it. My original thought was to
require range->slot to be invalid, but KVM (correctly) passes in the old, valid
memslot to kvm_arch_flush_shadow_memslot().
The goal with the assert is to detect as many bugs as possible, without adding
too much complexity, and also to document the rules for using kvm_unmap_gfn_range().
Actually, we can tighten the check, by verifying that the slot being unmapped is
valid, but that the slot that KVM sees is invalid. I'm not sure I love it though,
as it's absurdly specific.
(untested)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index c6716fd3666f..12b87b746b59 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -1552,6 +1552,17 @@ static bool __kvm_rmap_zap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm,
start, end - 1, can_yield, true, flush);
}
+static kvm_memslot_is_being_invalidated(const struct kvm_memory_slot *old)
+{
+ const struct kvm_memory_slot *new;
+
+ if (old->flags & KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID)
+ return false;
+
+ new = id_to_memslot(__kvm_memslots(kvm, old->as_id), old->id);
+ return new && new->flags & KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID;
+}
+
bool kvm_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range)
{
bool flush = false;
@@ -1564,7 +1575,8 @@ bool kvm_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range)
* vCPUs have unlocked SRCU and are guaranteed to see the invalid slot.
*/
lockdep_assert_once(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress ||
- lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock));
+ (lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock) &&
+ kvm_memslot_is_being_invalidated(range->slot));
if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm))
flush = __kvm_rmap_zap_gfn_range(kvm, range->slot,
> If a caller just holds slots_lock without calling
> "synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu)" as that in kvm_swap_active_memslots()
> to ensure the old slot is retired, stale data may still be encountered.
>
> > if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm))
> > flush = __kvm_rmap_zap_gfn_range(kvm, range->slot,
> > range->start, range->end,
> > --
> > 2.47.0.rc1.288.g06298d1525-goog
> >
