mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
To: seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>, "Jon Kohler" <jon@nutanix.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 11/18] KVM: VMX: Enhance EPT violation handler for PROT_USER_EXEC
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:36:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250313203702.575156-12-jon@nutanix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250313203702.575156-1-jon@nutanix.com>

From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>

Add EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_USER_EXEC (6) to reflect the user executable
permissions of a given address when Intel MBEC is enabled.

Refactor usage of EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_TO_PROT to understand all of the
specific bits that are now possible with MBEC.

Intel SDM 'Exit Qualification for EPT Violations' states the following
for Bit 6.
  If the “mode-based execute control” VM-execution control is 0, the
  value of this bit is undefined. If that control is 1, this bit is
  the logical-AND of bit 10 in the EPT paging-structure entries used
  to translate the guest-physical address of the access causing the
  EPT violation. In this case, it indicates whether the guest-physical
  address was executable for user-mode linear addresses.

  Bit 6 is cleared to 0 if (1) the “mode-based execute control”
  VM-execution control is 1; and (2) either (a) any of EPT
  paging-structure entries used to translate the guest-physical address
  of the access causing the EPT violation is not present; or
  (b) 4-level EPT is in use and the guest-physical address sets any
  bits in the range 51:48.

Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Co-developed-by: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
Signed-off-by: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>

---
 arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h     |  7 ++++---
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h | 15 ++++++++++++---
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c         |  7 +++++--
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h
index ffc90d672b5d..84c5be416f5c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h
@@ -587,6 +587,7 @@ enum vm_entry_failure_code {
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_READ		BIT(3)
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_WRITE	BIT(4)
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_EXEC		BIT(5)
+#define EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_USER_EXEC	BIT(6)
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK		(EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_READ  | \
 					 EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_WRITE | \
 					 EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_EXEC)
@@ -596,7 +597,7 @@ enum vm_entry_failure_code {
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_READ_TO_PROT(__epte) (((__epte) & VMX_EPT_READABLE_MASK) << 3)
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_WRITE_TO_PROT(__epte) (((__epte) & VMX_EPT_WRITABLE_MASK) << 3)
 #define EPT_VIOLATION_EXEC_TO_PROT(__epte) (((__epte) & VMX_EPT_EXECUTABLE_MASK) << 3)
-#define EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_TO_PROT(__epte) (((__epte) & VMX_EPT_RWX_MASK) << 3)
+#define EPT_VIOLATION_USER_EXEC_TO_PROT(__epte) (((__epte) & VMX_EPT_USER_EXECUTABLE_MASK) >> 4)
 
 static_assert(EPT_VIOLATION_READ_TO_PROT(VMX_EPT_READABLE_MASK) ==
 	      (EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_READ));
@@ -604,8 +605,8 @@ static_assert(EPT_VIOLATION_WRITE_TO_PROT(VMX_EPT_WRITABLE_MASK) ==
 	      (EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_WRITE));
 static_assert(EPT_VIOLATION_EXEC_TO_PROT(VMX_EPT_EXECUTABLE_MASK) ==
 	      (EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_EXEC));
-static_assert(EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_TO_PROT(VMX_EPT_RWX_MASK) ==
-	      (EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_READ | EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_WRITE | EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_EXEC));
+static_assert(EPT_VIOLATION_USER_EXEC_TO_PROT(VMX_EPT_USER_EXECUTABLE_MASK) ==
+	      (EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_USER_EXEC));
 
 /*
  * Exit Qualifications for NOTIFY VM EXIT
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
index 9bc3fc4a238b..a3a5cacda614 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
@@ -181,8 +181,9 @@ static inline unsigned FNAME(gpte_access)(u64 gpte)
 	unsigned access;
 #if PTTYPE == PTTYPE_EPT
 	access = ((gpte & VMX_EPT_WRITABLE_MASK) ? ACC_WRITE_MASK : 0) |
-		((gpte & VMX_EPT_EXECUTABLE_MASK) ? ACC_EXEC_MASK : 0) |
-		((gpte & VMX_EPT_READABLE_MASK) ? ACC_USER_MASK : 0);
+		 ((gpte & VMX_EPT_EXECUTABLE_MASK) ? ACC_EXEC_MASK : 0) |
+		 ((gpte & VMX_EPT_USER_EXECUTABLE_MASK) ? ACC_USER_EXEC_MASK : 0) |
+		 ((gpte & VMX_EPT_READABLE_MASK) ? ACC_USER_MASK : 0);
 #else
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(ACC_EXEC_MASK != PT_PRESENT_MASK);
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(ACC_EXEC_MASK != 1);
@@ -510,7 +511,15 @@ static int FNAME(walk_addr_generic)(struct guest_walker *walker,
 		 * Note, pte_access holds the raw RWX bits from the EPTE, not
 		 * ACC_*_MASK flags!
 		 */
-		walker->fault.exit_qualification |= EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_TO_PROT(pte_access);
+		walker->fault.exit_qualification |=
+			EPT_VIOLATION_READ_TO_PROT(pte_access);
+		walker->fault.exit_qualification |=
+			EPT_VIOLATION_WRITE_TO_PROT(pte_access);
+		walker->fault.exit_qualification |=
+			EPT_VIOLATION_EXEC_TO_PROT(pte_access);
+		if (vcpu->arch.pt_guest_exec_control)
+			walker->fault.exit_qualification |=
+				EPT_VIOLATION_USER_EXEC_TO_PROT(pte_access);
 	}
 #endif
 	walker->fault.address = addr;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
index 116910159a3f..0aadfa924045 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
@@ -5809,7 +5809,7 @@ static int handle_task_switch(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 
 static int handle_ept_violation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 {
-	unsigned long exit_qualification;
+	unsigned long exit_qualification, rwx_mask;
 	gpa_t gpa;
 	u64 error_code;
 
@@ -5839,7 +5839,10 @@ static int handle_ept_violation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_ACC_INSTR)
 		      ? PFERR_FETCH_MASK : 0;
 	/* ept page table entry is present? */
-	error_code |= (exit_qualification & EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK)
+	rwx_mask = EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK;
+	if (vcpu->arch.pt_guest_exec_control)
+		rwx_mask |= EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_USER_EXEC;
+	error_code |= (exit_qualification & rwx_mask)
 		      ? PFERR_PRESENT_MASK : 0;
 
 	if (error_code & EPT_VIOLATION_GVA_IS_VALID)
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-03-13 20:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-13 20:36 [RFC PATCH 00/18] KVM: VMX: Introduce Intel Mode-Based Execute Control (MBEC) Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 01/18] KVM: VMX: Remove EPT_VIOLATIONS_ACC_*_BIT defines Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 02/18] KVM: nVMX: Decouple EPT RWX bits from EPT Violation protection bits Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 03/18] KVM: x86: Add module parameter for Intel MBEC Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 18:08   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:18     ` Jon Kohler
2025-05-13  7:57       ` Shah, Amit
2025-12-23  4:15       ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 04/18] KVM: VMX: add cpu_has_vmx_mbec helper Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 18:14   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:17     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 05/18] KVM: x86: Add pt_guest_exec_control to kvm_vcpu_arch Jon Kohler
2025-04-22  6:27   ` Chao Gao
2025-05-12 18:15   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 06/18] KVM: VMX: Wire up Intel MBEC enable/disable logic Jon Kohler
2025-04-22  7:06   ` Chao Gao
2025-05-12 18:23   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:16     ` Jon Kohler
2025-05-13 13:28       ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-14 11:14         ` Shah, Amit
2025-05-14 12:55           ` Sean Christopherson
2025-06-16  9:27             ` Shah, Amit
2025-06-17 14:13               ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-09 13:40                 ` Shah, Amit
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 07/18] KVM: VMX: Define VMX_EPT_USER_EXECUTABLE_MASK Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 08/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Remove SPTE_PERM_MASK Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 09/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend access bitfield in kvm_mmu_page_role Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 18:32   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:14     ` Jon Kohler
2025-12-23  4:15       ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 10/18] KVM: VMX: Extend EPT Violation protection bits Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 18:37   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` Jon Kohler [this message]
2025-05-12 18:54   ` [RFC PATCH 11/18] KVM: VMX: Enhance EPT violation handler for PROT_USER_EXEC Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 12/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Introduce shadow_ux_mask Jon Kohler
2025-04-23  3:06   ` Chao Gao
2025-05-12 19:13   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 13/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Adjust SPTE_MMIO_ALLOWED_MASK to understand MBEC Jon Kohler
2025-04-23  5:37   ` Chao Gao
2025-05-12 19:37   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:11     ` Jon Kohler
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 14/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend is_executable_pte " Jon Kohler
2025-04-23  6:16   ` Chao Gao
2025-05-12 21:16   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:09     ` Jon Kohler
2025-12-23  4:15       ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 15/18] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend make_spte " Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 21:29   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:04     ` Jon Kohler
2025-05-13 17:54       ` Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 16/18] KVM: nVMX: Setup Intel MBEC in nested secondary controls Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 21:32   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-12-23  4:15     ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 17/18] KVM: VMX: Allow MBEC with EVMCS Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 21:35   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  2:01     ` Jon Kohler
2025-12-23  4:16       ` Jon Kohler
2025-03-13 20:36 ` [RFC PATCH 18/18] KVM: x86: Enable module parameter for MBEC Jon Kohler
2025-04-15  9:29 ` [RFC PATCH 00/18] KVM: VMX: Introduce Intel Mode-Based Execute Control (MBEC) Mickaël Salaün
2025-04-15 14:43   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-12 15:26     ` Jon Kohler
2025-04-15 14:43   ` Jon Kohler
2025-04-16 15:44     ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-04-23 13:54 ` Adrian-Ken Rueegsegger
2025-05-12 15:26   ` Jon Kohler
2025-05-12 21:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-05-13  1:59   ` Jon Kohler
2025-12-23  4:17   ` Jon Kohler

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=20250313203702.575156-12-jon@nutanix.com \
    --to=jon@nutanix.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mic@digikod.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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®