On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 07:49:15PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:18:55PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 07, 2022 at 10:31:49AM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > - In kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_dirty_log_ring(), set
> > > > 'dirty_ring_allow_bitmap' to
> > > > true when the capability is KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LONG_RING_ACQ_REL
> > >
> > > What I wanted to do is to decouple the ACQ_REL with ALLOW_BITMAP, so
> > > mostly
> > > as what you suggested, except..
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > >
> > > > static int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_dirty_log_ring(struct kvm *kvm, u32
> > > > cap, u32 size)
> > > > {
> > > > :
> > > > mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> > > >
> > > > if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
> > > > /* We don't allow to change this value after vcpu created */
> > > > r = -EINVAL;
> > > > } else {
> > > > kvm->dirty_ring_size = size;
> > >
> > > .. here I'd not set dirty_ring_allow_bitmap at all so I'd drop below line,
> > > instead..
> > >
> > > > kvm->dirty_ring_allow_bitmap = (cap ==
> > > > KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL);
> > > > r = 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> > > > return r;
> > > > }
> > > > - In kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(),
> > > > KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ALLOW_BITMAP
> > > > is always flase until KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL is enabled.
> > > >
> > > > static long kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(...)
> > > > {
> > > > :
> > > > case KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ALLOW_BITMAP:
> > > > return kvm->dirty_ring_allow_bitmap ? 1 : 0;
> > >
> > > ... here we always return 1, OTOH in kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap_generic():
> > >
> > > case KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ALLOW_BITMAP:
> > > if (kvm->dirty_ring_size)
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > kvm->dirty_ring_allow_bitmap = true;
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > A side effect of checking dirty_ring_size is then we'll be sure to have no
> > > vcpu created too. Maybe we should also check no memslot created to make
> > > sure the bitmaps are not created.
> >
> > I'm not sure I follow... What prevents userspace from creating a vCPU
> > between enabling the two caps?
>
> Enabling of dirty ring requires no vcpu created, so as to make sure all the
> vcpus will have the ring structures allocated as long as ring enabled for
> the vm. Done in kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_dirty_log_ring():
>
> if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
> /* We don't allow to change this value after vcpu created */
> r = -EINVAL;
> } else {
> kvm->dirty_ring_size = size;
> r = 0;
> }
>
> Then if we have KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ALLOW_BITMAP checking
> dirty_ring_size first then we make sure we need to configure both
> ALLOW_BITMAP and DIRTY_RING before any vcpu creation.
Ah, right. Sorry, I had the 'if' condition inverted in my head.
> >
> > > Then if the userspace wants to use the bitmap altogether with the ring, it
> > > needs to first detect KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ALLOW_BITMAP and enable it
> > > before it enables KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING.
> > >
> > > One trick on ALLOW_BITMAP is in mark_page_dirty_in_slot() - after we allow
> > > !vcpu case we'll need to make sure it won't accidentally try to set bitmap
> > > for !ALLOW_BITMAP, because in that case the bitmap pointer is NULL so
> > > set_bit_le() will directly crash the kernel.
> > >
> > > We could keep the old flavor of having a WARN_ON_ONCE(!vcpu &&
> > > !ALLOW_BITMAP) then return, but since now the userspace can easily trigger
> > > this (e.g. on ARM, a malicious userapp can have DIRTY_RING &&
> > > !ALLOW_BITMAP, then it can simply trigger the gic ioctl to trigger host
> > > warning), I think the better approach is we can kill the process in that
> > > case. Not sure whether there's anything better we can do.
> >
> > I don't believe !ALLOW_BITMAP && DIRTY_RING is a valid configuration for
> > arm64 given the fact that we'll dirty memory outside of a vCPU context.
>
> Yes it's not, but after Gavin's current series it'll be possible, IOW a
> malicious app can leverage this to trigger host warning, which is IMHO not
> wanted.
>
> >
> > Could ALLOW_BITMAP be a requirement of DIRTY_RING, thereby making
> > userspace fail fast? Otherwise (at least on arm64) your VM is DOA on the
> > target. With that the old WARN() could be preserved, as you suggest.
>
> It's just that x86 doesn't need the bitmap, so it'll be a pure waste there
> otherwise. It's not only about the memory that will be wasted (that's
> guest mem size / 32k), but also the sync() process for x86 will be all
> zeros and totally meaningless - note that the sync() of bitmap will be part
> of VM downtime in this case (we need to sync() after turning VM off), so it
> will make x86 downtime larger but without any benefit.
Ah, my follow-up [1] missed by just a few minutes :)
I think this further drives the point home -- there's zero need for the
bitmap with dirty ring on x86, so why even support it? The proposal of
ALLOW_BITMAP && DIRTY_RING should be arm64-specific. Any other arch that
needs to dirty memory outside of a vCPU context can opt-in to the
behavior.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/y0sujee3owl2q...@google.com/
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
