On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:32 AM Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 10:27:12PM +0000, Vishal Annapurve wrote:
> > Direct HLT instruction execution causes #VEs for TDX VMs which is routed
> > to hypervisor via TDCALL. safe_halt() routines execute HLT in STI-shadow
> > so IRQs need to remain disabled until the TDCALL to ensure that pending
> > IRQs are correctly treated as wake events. So "sti;hlt" sequence needs to
> > be replaced with "TDCALL; raw_local_irq_enable()" for TDX VMs.
> >
> > Commit bfe6ed0c6727 ("x86/tdx: Add HLT support for TDX guests")
> > prevented the idle routines from using "sti;hlt". But it missed the
> > paravirt routine which can be reached like this as an example:
> > acpi_safe_halt() =>
> > raw_safe_halt() =>
> > arch_safe_halt() =>
> > irq.safe_halt() =>
> > pv_native_safe_halt()
> >
> > Modify tdx_safe_halt() to implement the sequence "TDCALL;
> > raw_local_irq_enable()" and invoke tdx_halt() from idle routine which just
> > executes TDCALL without changing state of interrupts.
> >
> > If CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is disabled, "sti;hlt" sequences can still get
> > executed from TDX VMs via paths like:
> > acpi_safe_halt() =>
> > raw_safe_halt() =>
> > arch_safe_halt() =>
> > native_safe_halt()
> > There is a long term plan to fix these paths by carving out
> > irq.safe_halt() outside paravirt framework.
>
> I don't think it is acceptable to keep !PARAVIRT_XXL (read no-Xen) config
> broken.
>
> We need either move irq.safe_halt() out of PARAVIRT_XXL now or make
> non-paravirt arch_safe_halt() to use TDCALL. Or if we don't care about
> performance of !PARAVIRT_XXL config, special-case HLT in
> exc_virtualization_exception().
I will post v4 with the patch [1] move safe_halt/halt out of
PARAVIRT_XXL included as the next step.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210517235008.257241-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> --
> Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
