mbox series

[V3,00/12] KVM: X86/MMU: Use one-off local shadow page for special roots

Message ID 20220521131700.3661-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series KVM: X86/MMU: Use one-off local shadow page for special roots | expand

Message

Lai Jiangshan May 21, 2022, 1:16 p.m. UTC
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>

Current code uses mmu->pae_root, mmu->pml4_root, and mmu->pml5_root to
setup special roots.  The initialization code is complex and the roots
are not associated with struct kvm_mmu_page which causes the code more
complex.

So add new local shadow pages to simplify it.

The local shadow pages are associated with struct kvm_mmu_page and
VCPU-local.

The local shadow pages are created and freed when the roots are
changed (or one-off) which can be optimized but not in the patchset
since the re-creating is light way (in normal case only the struct
kvm_mmu_page needs to be re-allocated and sp->spt doens't, because
it is likely to be mmu->pae_root)

The patchset also fixes a possible bug described in:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220415103414.86555-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com/
as patch1.

And the fixing is simplifed in patch9 with the help of local shadow page.

Note:
using_local_root_page() can be implemented in two ways.

static bool using_local_root_page(struct kvm_mmu *mmu)
{
	return mmu->root_role.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL ||
	       (!mmu->root_role.direct && mmu->cpu_role.base.level <= PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL);
}

static bool using_local_root_page(struct kvm_mmu *mmu)
{
	if (mmu->root_role.direct)
		return mmu->root_role.level == PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL;
	else
		return mmu->cpu_role.base.level <= PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL;
}

I prefer the second way.  But when I wrote the documents for them.  I
couldn't explain well enough for the second way.  Maybe I explained the
second way in a wrong aspect or my English is not qualified to explain
it.

So I put the first way in patch 2 and the second way in patch3.
Patch3 adds much more documents and changes the first way to the second
way.  Patch3 can be discarded.

Changed from v2:
	Add document for using_local_root_page()
	Update many documents
	Address review comments
	Add a patch that fix a possible bug (and split other patches for patch9)

Changed from v1:
	Rebase to newest kvm/queue. Slightly update patch4.

[V2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220503150735.32723-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com/
[V1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220420132605.3813-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com/


Lai Jiangshan (12):
  KVM: X86/MMU: Verify PDPTE for nested NPT in PAE paging mode when page
    fault
  KVM: X86/MMU: Add using_local_root_page()
  KVM: X86/MMU: Reduce a check in using_local_root_page() for common
    cases
  KVM: X86/MMU: Add local shadow pages
  KVM: X86/MMU: Link PAE root pagetable with its children
  KVM: X86/MMU: Activate local shadow pages and remove old logic
  KVM: X86/MMU: Remove the check of the return value of to_shadow_page()
  KVM: X86/MMU: Allocate mmu->pae_root for PAE paging on-demand
  KVM: X86/MMU: Move the verifying of NPT's PDPTE in FNAME(fetch)
  KVM: X86/MMU: Remove unused INVALID_PAE_ROOT and IS_VALID_PAE_ROOT
  KVM: X86/MMU: Don't use mmu->pae_root when shadowing PAE NPT in 64-bit
    host
  KVM: X86/MMU: Remove mmu_alloc_special_roots()

 arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |   5 +-
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c          | 575 ++++++++++++++------------------
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h |  10 -
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h  |  51 ++-
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c         |   7 +
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.h         |   1 +
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.h      |   7 +-
 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c              |   4 +-
 8 files changed, 303 insertions(+), 357 deletions(-)

Comments

Lai Jiangshan May 26, 2022, 8:49 a.m. UTC | #1
On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 9:16 PM Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>
>
> Current code uses mmu->pae_root, mmu->pml4_root, and mmu->pml5_root to
> setup special roots.  The initialization code is complex and the roots
> are not associated with struct kvm_mmu_page which causes the code more
> complex.
>
> So add new local shadow pages to simplify it.
>
> The local shadow pages are associated with struct kvm_mmu_page and
> VCPU-local.
>
> The local shadow pages are created and freed when the roots are
> changed (or one-off) which can be optimized but not in the patchset
> since the re-creating is light way (in normal case only the struct
> kvm_mmu_page needs to be re-allocated and sp->spt doens't, because
> it is likely to be mmu->pae_root)
>
> The patchset also fixes a possible bug described in:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220415103414.86555-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com/
> as patch1.
>

Ping and please ignore patch1 and patch9. It would not cause any conflict
without patch1 and patch9 if both are ignored together.

The fix is wrong (see new discussion in the above link).  So the possible
correct fix will not have any conflict with this patchset of one-off
local shadow page.  I don't want to add extra stuff in this patchset
anymore.

Thanks
Lai
David Matlack May 26, 2022, 8:27 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 04:49:09PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 9:16 PM Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@antgroup.com>
> >
> > Current code uses mmu->pae_root, mmu->pml4_root, and mmu->pml5_root to
> > setup special roots.  The initialization code is complex and the roots
> > are not associated with struct kvm_mmu_page which causes the code more
> > complex.
> >
> > So add new local shadow pages to simplify it.
> >
> > The local shadow pages are associated with struct kvm_mmu_page and
> > VCPU-local.
> >
> > The local shadow pages are created and freed when the roots are
> > changed (or one-off) which can be optimized but not in the patchset
> > since the re-creating is light way (in normal case only the struct
> > kvm_mmu_page needs to be re-allocated and sp->spt doens't, because
> > it is likely to be mmu->pae_root)
> >
> > The patchset also fixes a possible bug described in:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220415103414.86555-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com/
> > as patch1.
> >
> 
> Ping and please ignore patch1 and patch9. It would not cause any conflict
> without patch1 and patch9 if both are ignored together.
> 
> The fix is wrong (see new discussion in the above link).  So the possible
> correct fix will not have any conflict with this patchset of one-off
> local shadow page.  I don't want to add extra stuff in this patchset
> anymore.

Yeah I agree with splitting this fix out to a separate patchset, and
ordered after this cleanup so it can be done in one patch.

When you get around to it, can you also implement a kvm-unit-test to
demonstrate the bug? It would be good to have a regression test.

> 
> Thanks
> Lai