Message ID | 20220311002528.2230172-18-dmatlack@google.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Handled Elsewhere |
Headers | show |
Series | Extend Eager Page Splitting to the shadow MMU | expand |
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:25:19AM +0000, David Matlack wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > index 85b7bc333302..541b145b2df2 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > @@ -1430,7 +1430,7 @@ static int tdp_mmu_split_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter, > * not been linked in yet and thus is not reachable from any other CPU. > */ > for (i = 0; i < PT64_ENT_PER_PAGE; i++) > - sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i); > + sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i, ACC_ALL); Pure question: is it possible that huge_spte is RO while we passed in ACC_ALL here (which has the write bit set)? Would it be better if we make it a "bool exec" to be clearer?
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:44 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:25:19AM +0000, David Matlack wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > index 85b7bc333302..541b145b2df2 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c > > @@ -1430,7 +1430,7 @@ static int tdp_mmu_split_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter, > > * not been linked in yet and thus is not reachable from any other CPU. > > */ > > for (i = 0; i < PT64_ENT_PER_PAGE; i++) > > - sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i); > > + sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i, ACC_ALL); > > Pure question: is it possible that huge_spte is RO while we passed in > ACC_ALL here (which has the write bit set)? Yes that is possible, but only if KVM the page is RO due to host-side policies (e.g. RO memslot or RO VMA). "access" here is the guest-allowed access permissions, similar to the pte_access parameter to mmu_set_spte(). e.g. notice how the TDP MMU passes ACC_ALL to make_spte(). > Would it be better if we make it a "bool exec" to be clearer? But all that being said, the ACC_ALL stuff is confusing for exactly the reason you pointed out so it doesn't make sense to duplicate it further. I agree it would make more sense to pass in bool exec. > > -- > Peter Xu >
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c index d10189d9c877..7294f95464a7 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c @@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ static u64 make_spte_executable(u64 spte) * This is used during huge page splitting to build the SPTEs that make up the * new page table. */ -u64 make_huge_page_split_spte(u64 huge_spte, int huge_level, int index) +u64 make_huge_page_split_spte(u64 huge_spte, int huge_level, int index, + unsigned int access) { u64 child_spte; int child_level; @@ -244,7 +245,7 @@ u64 make_huge_page_split_spte(u64 huge_spte, int huge_level, int index) * When splitting to a 4K page, mark the page executable as the * NX hugepage mitigation no longer applies. */ - if (is_nx_huge_page_enabled()) + if (is_nx_huge_page_enabled() && (access & ACC_EXEC_MASK)) child_spte = make_spte_executable(child_spte); } diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.h index 73f12615416f..c7ccdd5c440d 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.h +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.h @@ -415,7 +415,8 @@ bool make_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, unsigned int pte_access, gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, u64 old_spte, bool prefetch, bool can_unsync, bool host_writable, u64 *new_spte); -u64 make_huge_page_split_spte(u64 huge_spte, int huge_level, int index); +u64 make_huge_page_split_spte(u64 huge_spte, int huge_level, int index, + unsigned int access); u64 make_nonleaf_spte(u64 *child_pt, bool ad_disabled); u64 make_mmio_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 gfn, unsigned int access); u64 mark_spte_for_access_track(u64 spte); diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c index 85b7bc333302..541b145b2df2 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c @@ -1430,7 +1430,7 @@ static int tdp_mmu_split_huge_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter, * not been linked in yet and thus is not reachable from any other CPU. */ for (i = 0; i < PT64_ENT_PER_PAGE; i++) - sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i); + sp->spt[i] = make_huge_page_split_spte(huge_spte, level, i, ACC_ALL); /* * Replace the huge spte with a pointer to the populated lower level