Re: [PATCH 38/44] KVM: Disable CPU hotplug during hardware enabling
From: Huang, Kai <hidden>
Date: 2022-11-10 01:09:11
Also in:
kvm, kvm-riscv, kvmarm, linux-mips, linux-riscv, linux-s390, linuxppc-dev, lkml
On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:19 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Chao Gao <redacted> Disable CPU hotplug during hardware_enable_all() to prevent the corner case where if the following sequence occurs: 1. A hotplugged CPU marks itself online in cpu_online_mask 2. The hotplugged CPU enables interrupt before invoking KVM's ONLINE callback 3 hardware_enable_all() is invoked on another CPU right the hotplugged CPU will be included in on_each_cpu() and thus get sent through hardware_enable_nolock() before kvm_online_cpu() is called. start_secondary { ... set_cpu_online(smp_processor_id(), true); <- 1 ... local_irq_enable(); <- 2 ... cpu_startup_entry(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE); <- 3 } KVM currently fudges around this race by keeping track of which CPUs have done hardware enabling (see commit 1b6c016818a5 "KVM: Keep track of which cpus have virtualization enabled"), but that's an inefficient, convoluted, and hacky solution. Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <redacted> [sean: split to separate patch, write changelog] Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> --- arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 8 +++++++- virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 10 ++++++++++ 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index a7b1d916ecb2..a15e54ba0471 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c@@ -9283,7 +9283,13 @@ static int kvm_x86_check_processor_compatibility(struct kvm_x86_init_ops *ops) int cpu = smp_processor_id(); struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu); - WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()); + /* + * Compatibility checks are done when loading KVM and when enabling + * hardware, e.g. during CPU hotplug, to ensure all online CPUs are + * compatible, i.e. KVM should never perform a compatibility check on + * an offline CPU. + */ + WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled() && cpu_active(cpu));
Comment doesn't match with the code? "KVM should never perform a compatibility check on on offline CPU" should be something like: WARN_ON(!cpu_online(cpu)); So, should the comment be something like below? "KVM compatibility check happens before CPU is marked as active".
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
if (__cr4_reserved_bits(cpu_has, c) != __cr4_reserved_bits(cpu_has, &boot_cpu_data))diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c index fd9e39c85549..4e765ef9f4bd 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c@@ -5088,6 +5088,15 @@ static int hardware_enable_all(void) { int r = 0; + /* + * When onlining a CPU, cpu_online_mask is set before kvm_online_cpu() + * is called, and so on_each_cpu() between them includes the CPU that + * is being onlined. As a result, hardware_enable_nolock() may get + * invoked before kvm_online_cpu(). + * + * Disable CPU hotplug to prevent scenarios where KVM sees + */
The above sentence is broken. I think below comment Quoted from Isaku's series should be OK? /* * During onlining a CPU, cpu_online_mask is set before kvm_online_cpu() * is called. on_each_cpu() between them includes the CPU. As a result, * hardware_enable_nolock() may get invoked before kvm_online_cpu(). * This would enable hardware virtualization on that cpu without * compatibility checks, which can potentially crash system or break * running VMs. * * Disable CPU hotplug to prevent this case from happening. */
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ cpus_read_lock(); raw_spin_lock(&kvm_count_lock); kvm_usage_count++;@@ -5102,6 +5111,7 @@ static int hardware_enable_all(void) } raw_spin_unlock(&kvm_count_lock); + cpus_read_unlock(); return r; }
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel