From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Wei Huang <whuang2@amd.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] KVM: x86: allocate vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries dynamically
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 19:41:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200918024117.GC14678@sjchrist-ice> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200915154306.724953-2-vkuznets@redhat.com>
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 05:43:05PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> The current limit for guest CPUID leaves (KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES, 80)
> is reported to be insufficient but before we bump it let's switch to
> allocating vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries dynamically. Currenly,
Currently,
> 'struct kvm_cpuid_entry2' is 40 bytes so vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries is
> 3200 bytes which accounts for 1/4 of the whole 'struct kvm_vcpu_arch'
> but having it pre-allocated (for all vCPUs which we also pre-allocate)
> gives us no benefits.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
> ---
...
> @@ -241,18 +253,31 @@ int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_set_cpuid2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct kvm_cpuid2 *cpuid,
> struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 __user *entries)
> {
> + struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *cpuid_entries2 = NULL;
> int r;
>
> r = -E2BIG;
> if (cpuid->nent > KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES)
> goto out;
> r = -EFAULT;
> - if (copy_from_user(&vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries, entries,
> - cpuid->nent * sizeof(struct kvm_cpuid_entry2)))
> - goto out;
> +
> + if (cpuid->nent) {
> + cpuid_entries2 = vmemdup_user(entries,
> + array_size(sizeof(cpuid_entries2[0]),
> + cpuid->nent));
Any objection to using something super short like "e2" instead of cpuid_entries2
so that this can squeeze on a single line, or at least be a little more sane?
> + if (IS_ERR(cpuid_entries2)) {
> + r = PTR_ERR(cpuid_entries2);
> + goto out;
Don't suppose you'd want to opportunistically kill off these gotos?
> + }
> + }
> + kvfree(vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries);
This is a bit odd. The previous vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries is preserved on
allocation failure, but not on kvm_check_cpuid() failure. Being destructive
on the "check" failure was always a bit odd, but it really stands out now.
Given that kvm_check_cpuid() now only does an actual check and not a big
pile of updates, what if we refactored the guts of kvm_find_cpuid_entry()
into yet another helper so that kvm_check_cpuid() could check the input
before crushing vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries?
if (cpuid->nent) {
e2 = vmemdup_user(entries, array_size(sizeof(e2[0]), cpuid->nent));
if (IS_ERR(e2))
return PTR_ERR(e2);
r = kvm_check_cpuid(e2, cpuid->nent);
if (r)
return r;
}
vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries = e2;
vcpu->arch.cpuid_nent = cpuid->nent;
return 0;
> + vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries = cpuid_entries2;
> vcpu->arch.cpuid_nent = cpuid->nent;
> +
> r = kvm_check_cpuid(vcpu);
> if (r) {
> + kvfree(vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries);
> + vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries = NULL;
> vcpu->arch.cpuid_nent = 0;
> goto out;
> }
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 1994602a0851..42259a6ec1d8 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -9610,6 +9610,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> kvm_mmu_destroy(vcpu);
> srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, idx);
> free_page((unsigned long)vcpu->arch.pio_data);
> + kvfree(vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries);
> if (!lapic_in_kernel(vcpu))
> static_key_slow_dec(&kvm_no_apic_vcpu);
> }
> --
> 2.25.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-18 2:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-15 15:43 [PATCH RFC 0/2] KVM: x86: allow for more CPUID entries Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-15 15:43 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] KVM: x86: allocate vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries dynamically Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-18 2:41 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2020-10-01 10:04 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-15 15:43 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] KVM: x86: bump KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-15 16:51 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] KVM: x86: allow for more CPUID entries Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-16 3:49 ` Wei Huang
2020-09-16 7:44 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-16 8:33 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-16 19:22 ` Wei Huang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200918024117.GC14678@sjchrist-ice \
--to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=whuang2@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®