Thread (67 messages) 67 messages, 3 authors, 2022-02-10

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 14/26] KVM: arm64: Add consistency checking for frac fields of ID registers

From: Fuad Tabba <hidden>
Date: 2022-01-24 17:02:45
Also in: kvm, kvmarm

Hi Reiji,

On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 4:29 AM Reiji Watanabe [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Feature fractional field of an ID register cannot be simply validated
at KVM_SET_ONE_REG because its validity depends on its (main) feature
field value, which could be in a different ID register (and might be
set later).
Validate fractional fields at the first KVM_RUN instead.

Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <redacted>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h |   1 +
 arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c              |   3 +
 arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c         | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 4509f9e7472d..7b3f86bd6a6b 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -750,6 +750,7 @@ long kvm_vm_ioctl_mte_copy_tags(struct kvm *kvm,

 void set_default_id_regs(struct kvm *kvm);
 int kvm_set_id_reg_feature(struct kvm *kvm, u32 id, u8 field_shift, u8 fval);
+int kvm_id_regs_consistency_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);

 /* Guest/host FPSIMD coordination helpers */
 int kvm_arch_vcpu_run_map_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
index 5f497a0af254..16fc2ce32069 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
@@ -596,6 +596,9 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_first_run_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
        if (!kvm_arm_vcpu_is_finalized(vcpu))
                return -EPERM;

+       if (!kvm_vm_is_protected(kvm) && kvm_id_regs_consistency_check(vcpu))
+               return -EPERM;
+
        vcpu->arch.has_run_once = true;

        kvm_arm_vcpu_init_debug(vcpu);
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index ddbeefc3881c..6adb7b04620c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -756,9 +756,6 @@ static struct id_reg_info id_aa64pfr0_el1_info = {

 static struct id_reg_info id_aa64pfr1_el1_info = {
        .sys_reg = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
-       .ignore_mask = ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR1_RASFRAC) |
-                      ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR1_MPAMFRAC) |
-                      ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR1_CSV2FRAC),
        .init = init_id_aa64pfr1_el1_info,
        .validate = validate_id_aa64pfr1_el1,
        .vcpu_mask = vcpu_mask_id_aa64pfr1_el1,
@@ -3434,10 +3431,109 @@ int kvm_arm_copy_sys_reg_indices(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __user *uindices)
        return write_demux_regids(uindices);
 }

+/* ID register's fractional field information with its feature field. */
+struct feature_frac {
+       u32     id;
+       u32     shift;
+       u32     frac_id;
+       u32     frac_shift;
+       u8      frac_ftr_check;
+};
frac_ftr_check doesn't seem to be used. Also, it would be easier to
read if the ordering of the fields match the ordering you initialize
them below.
+
+static struct feature_frac feature_frac_table[] = {
+       {
+               .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+               .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_RASFRAC_SHIFT,
+               .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+               .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_RAS_SHIFT,
+       },
+       {
+               .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+               .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_MPAMFRAC_SHIFT,
+               .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+               .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_MPAM_SHIFT,
+       },
+       {
+               .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+               .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_CSV2FRAC_SHIFT,
+               .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+               .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_CSV2_SHIFT,
+       },
+};
+
+/*
+ * Return non-zero if the feature/fractional fields pair are not
+ * supported. Return zero otherwise.
+ * This function validates only the fractional feature field,
+ * and relies on the fact the feature field is validated before
+ * through arm64_check_features.
+ */
+static int vcpu_id_reg_feature_frac_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
+                                         const struct feature_frac *ftr_frac)
+{
+       const struct id_reg_info *id_reg;
+       u32 id;
+       u64 val, lim, mask;
+
+       /* Check if the feature field value is same as the limit */
+       id = ftr_frac->id;
+       id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(id);
+
+       mask = (u64)ARM64_FEATURE_FIELD_MASK << ftr_frac->shift;
+       val = __read_id_reg(vcpu, id) & mask;
+       lim = id_reg ? id_reg->vcpu_limit_val : read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
+       lim &= mask;
+
+       if (val != lim)
+               /*
+                * The feature level is lower than the limit.
+                * Any fractional version should be fine.
+                */
+               return 0;
+
+       /* Check the fractional feature field */
+       id = ftr_frac->frac_id;
+       id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(id);
+
+       mask = (u64)ARM64_FEATURE_FIELD_MASK << ftr_frac->frac_shift;
+       val = __read_id_reg(vcpu, id) & mask;
+       lim = id_reg ? id_reg->vcpu_limit_val : read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
+       lim &= mask;
+
+       if (val == lim)
+               /*
+                * Both the feature and fractional fields are the same
+                * as limit.
+                */
+               return 0;
+
+       return arm64_check_features(id, val, lim);
+}
+
+int kvm_id_regs_consistency_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
Nit: considering that this is only checking the fractional fields,
should the function name reflect that?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+{
+       int i, err;
+       const struct feature_frac *frac;
+
+       /*
+        * Check ID registers' fractional fields, which aren't checked
+        * at KVM_SET_ONE_REG.
+        */
+       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_frac_table); i++) {
+               frac = &feature_frac_table[i];
+               err = vcpu_id_reg_feature_frac_check(vcpu, frac);
+               if (err)
+                       return err;
+       }
+       return 0;
+}
+
 static void id_reg_info_init_all(void)
 {
        int i;
        struct id_reg_info *id_reg;
+       struct feature_frac *frac;
+       u64 ftr_mask = ARM64_FEATURE_FIELD_MASK;

        for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(id_reg_info_table); i++) {
                id_reg = (struct id_reg_info *)id_reg_info_table[i];
@@ -3446,6 +3542,20 @@ static void id_reg_info_init_all(void)

                id_reg_info_init(id_reg);
        }
+
+       /*
+        * Update ignore_mask of ID registers based on fractional fields
+        * information.  Any ID register that have fractional fields
+        * is expected to have its own id_reg_info.
+        */
+       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_frac_table); i++) {
+               frac = &feature_frac_table[i];
+               id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(frac->frac_id);
+               if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!id_reg))
+                       continue;
+
+               id_reg->ignore_mask |= ftr_mask << frac->frac_shift;
+       }
 }
Thanks,
/fuad

 void kvm_sys_reg_table_init(void)
--
2.34.1.448.ga2b2bfdf31-goog

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help