lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH Part2 RFC v4 10/40] x86/fault: Add support to handle the RMP fault for user address
From
Date
Hi Dave,


On 7/8/21 11:16 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> "SIGBUG"?

Its typo, it should be SIGBUS

>> +
>> + if (unlikely(!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP)))
>> + return RMP_FAULT_KILL;
>
> Shouldn't this be a WARN_ON_ONCE()? How can we get RMP faults without
> SEV-SNP?

Yes, we should *not* get RMP fault if SEV-SNP is not enabled. I can use
the WARN_ON_ONCE().


>
>> + /* Get the native page level */
>> + pte = lookup_address_in_mm(current->mm, address, &level);
>> + if (unlikely(!pte))
>> + return RMP_FAULT_KILL;
>
> What would this mean? There was an RMP fault on a non-present page?
> How could that happen? What if there was a race between an unmapping
> event and the RMP fault delivery?

We should not have RMP fault for non-present pages. But you have a good
point that there maybe a race between the unmap event and RMP fault.
Instead of terminating the process we should simply retry.


>
>> + pfn = pte_pfn(*pte);
>> + if (level > PG_LEVEL_4K) {
>> + mask = pages_per_hpage(level) - pages_per_hpage(level - 1);
>> + pfn |= (address >> PAGE_SHIFT) & mask;
>> + }
>
> This looks inherently racy. What happens if there are two parallel RMP
> faults on the same 2M page. One of them splits the page tables, the
> other gets a fault for an already-split page table.
> > Is that handled here somehow?

Yes, in this particular case we simply retry and hardware should
re-evaluate the page level and take the corrective action.


>
>> + /* Get the page level from the RMP entry. */
>> + e = snp_lookup_page_in_rmptable(pfn_to_page(pfn), &rmp_level);
>> + if (!e)
>> + return RMP_FAULT_KILL;
>
> The snp_lookup_page_in_rmptable() failure cases looks WARN-worthly.
> Either you're doing a lookup for something not *IN* the RMP table, or
> you don't support SEV-SNP, in which case you shouldn't be in this code
> in the first place.

Noted.

>
>> + /*
>> + * Check if the RMP violation is due to the guest private page access.
>> + * We can not resolve this RMP fault, ask to kill the guest.
>> + */
>> + if (rmpentry_assigned(e))
>> + return RMP_FAULT_KILL;
>
> No "We's", please. Speak in imperative voice.

Noted.

>
>> + /*
>> + * The backing page level is higher than the RMP page level, request
>> + * to split the page.
>> + */
>> + if (level > rmp_level)
>> + return RMP_FAULT_PAGE_SPLIT;
>
> This can theoretically trigger on a hugetlbfs page. Right?
>

Yes, theoretically.

In the current implementation, the VMM is enlightened to not use the
hugetlbfs for backing page when creating the SEV-SNP guests.


> I thought I asked about this before... more below...
>
>> + return RMP_FAULT_RETRY;
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * Handle faults in the user portion of the address space. Nothing in here
>> * should check X86_PF_USER without a specific justification: for almost
>> @@ -1298,6 +1350,7 @@ void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs,
>> struct task_struct *tsk;
>> struct mm_struct *mm;
>> vm_fault_t fault;
>> + int ret;
>> unsigned int flags = FAULT_FLAG_DEFAULT;
>>
>> tsk = current;
>> @@ -1378,6 +1431,22 @@ void
> (struct pt_regs *regs,
>> if (error_code & X86_PF_INSTR)
>> flags |= FAULT_FLAG_INSTRUCTION;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * If its an RMP violation, try resolving it.
>> + */
>> + if (error_code & X86_PF_RMP) {
>> + ret = handle_user_rmp_page_fault(error_code, address);
>> + if (ret == RMP_FAULT_PAGE_SPLIT) {
>> + flags |= FAULT_FLAG_PAGE_SPLIT;
>> + } else if (ret == RMP_FAULT_KILL) {
>> + fault |= VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>> + do_sigbus(regs, error_code, address, fault);
>> + return;
>> + } else {
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + }
>
> Why not just have handle_user_rmp_page_fault() return a VM_FAULT_* code
> directly?
>

I don't have any strong reason against it. In next rev, I can update to
use the VM_FAULT_* code and call the do_sigbus() etc.

> I also suspect you can just set VM_FAULT_SIGBUS and let the do_sigbus()
> call later on in the function do its work.
>>
>> +static int handle_split_page_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> +{
>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT))
>> + return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>> +
>> + __split_huge_pmd(vmf->vma, vmf->pmd, vmf->address, false, NULL);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> What will this do when you hand it a hugetlbfs page?
>

VMM is updated to not use the hugetlbfs when creating SEV-SNP guests.
So, we should not run into it.

-Brijesh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-12 17:45    [W:0.262 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site