On 08/07/2013 02:46 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2013-08-07 14:39, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 05:57:02PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2013-08-06 17:53, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 05:48:54PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2013-08-06 17:04, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-08-06:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 02:12:51PM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-08-06:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:44:41AM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-08-06:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:39:59AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com>

If nested EPT is enabled, the L2 guest may change CR3 without any
exits. We therefore have to read the current value from the VMCS
when switching to L1. However, if paging wasn't enabled, L0 tracks
L2's CR3, and GUEST_CR3 rather contains the real-mode identity map.
So we need to retrieve CR3 from the architectural state after
conditionally updating it - and this is what kvm_read_cr3 does.

I have a headache from trying to think about it already, but
shouldn't
L1 be the one who setups identity map for L2? I traced what
vmcs_read64(GUEST_CR3)/kvm_read_cr3(vcpu) return here and do not
see
Here is my understanding:
In vmx_set_cr3(), if enabled ept, it will check whether target
vcpu is enabling
paging. When L2 running in real mode, then target vcpu is not
enabling paging and it will use L0's identity map for L2. If you
read GUEST_CR3 from VMCS, then you may get the L2's identity map
not
L1's.

Yes, but why it makes sense to use L0 identity map for L2? I didn't
see different vmcs_read64(GUEST_CR3)/kvm_read_cr3(vcpu) values because
L0 and L1 use the same identity map address. When I changed identity
address L1 configures vmcs_read64(GUEST_CR3)/kvm_read_cr3(vcpu) are
indeed different, but the real CR3 L2 uses points to L0 identity map.
If I zero L1 identity map page L2 still works.

If L2 in real mode, then L2PA == L1PA. So L0's identity map also works
if L2 is in real mode.

That not the point. It may work accidentally for kvm on kvm, but what
if other hypervisor plays different tricks and builds different ident map for 
its guest?
Yes, if other hypervisor doesn't build the 1:1 mapping for its guest, it will 
fail to work. But I cannot imagine what kind of hypervisor will do this and 
what the purpose is.
Anyway, current logic is definitely wrong. It should use L1's identity map 
instead L0's.

So something like this is rather needed?

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
index 44494ed..60a3644 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -3375,8 +3375,10 @@ static void vmx_set_cr3(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned 
long cr3)
        if (enable_ept) {
                eptp = construct_eptp(cr3);
                vmcs_write64(EPT_POINTER, eptp);
-               guest_cr3 = is_paging(vcpu) ? kvm_read_cr3(vcpu) :
-                       vcpu->kvm->arch.ept_identity_map_addr;
+               if (is_paging(vcpu) || is_guest_mode(vcpu))
+                       guest_cr3 = kvm_read_cr3(vcpu) :
+               else
+                       guest_cr3 = vcpu->kvm->arch.ept_identity_map_addr;
                ept_load_pdptrs(vcpu);
        }

That what I am thinking, will think about it some more tomorrow.

OK, and I'll feed it into a local test.

Thought about is some more. So without nested unrestricted guest (nUG)
is_paging() will always be true (since without nUG guest entry is not
possible otherwise) and guest's cr3 will be used, but with nUG identity
map is not used (that is why L2 still works even though wrong identity
map pointer is assigned to cr3), so the code here just corrupts nested
guest's cr3 for no reason and that is why you had to use kvm_read_cr3()
in prepare_vmcs12() to get correct cr3 value. The patch above should be
used instead of original one IMO. How is testing going?

Yes, testing worked fine. I've queued above patch and will send it out
within the next round.

Just reply here with the commit message you desire and Signed-off-by, so I can queue it for people who wish to play with nEPT.

Paolo


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to