mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@amd.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiaxi Chen <jiaxi.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jing Liu <jing2.liu@intel.com>,
	Wyes Karny <wyes.karny@amd.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] KVM: x86: add a delayed hardware NMI injection interface
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:52:38 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b5994e2-15ba-dd57-285c-fb33827a5275@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+PIdJZtCsGH2Sw3@google.com>



On 2/8/2023 9:36 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023, Santosh Shukla wrote:
>> On 2/1/2023 3:58 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>>>> @@ -5191,9 +5191,12 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_set_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>>>  
>>>>  	vcpu->arch.nmi_injected = events->nmi.injected;
>>>>  	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING)
>>>> -		vcpu->arch.nmi_pending = events->nmi.pending;
>>>> +		atomic_add(events->nmi.pending, &vcpu->arch.nmi_queued);
>>>> +
>>>>  	static_call(kvm_x86_set_nmi_mask)(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);
>>>>  
>>>> +	process_nmi(vcpu);
>>>
>>> Argh, having two process_nmi() calls is ugly (not blaming your code, it's KVM's
>>> ABI that's ugly).  E.g. if we collapse this down, it becomes:
>>>
>>> 	process_nmi(vcpu);
>>>
>>> 	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING) {
>>> 		<blah blah blah>
>>> 	}
>>> 	static_call(kvm_x86_set_nmi_mask)(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);
>>>
>>> 	process_nmi(vcpu);
>>>
>>> And the second mess is that V_NMI needs to be cleared.
>>>
>>
>> Can you please elaborate on "V_NMI cleared" scenario? Are you mentioning
>> about V_NMI_MASK or svm->nmi_masked?
> 
> V_NMI_MASK.  KVM needs to purge any pending virtual NMIs when userspace sets
> vCPU event state and KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING is set.
> 

As per the APM: V_NMI_MASK is managed by the processor
"
V_NMI_MASK: Indicates whether virtual NMIs are masked. The processor will set V_NMI_MASK
once it takes the virtual NMI. V_NMI_MASK is cleared when the guest successfully completes an
IRET instruction or #VMEXIT occurs while delivering the virtual NMI
"

In my initial implementation I had changed V_NMI_MASK for the SMM scenario [1],
This is also not required as HW will save the V_NMI/V_NMI_MASK on 
SMM entry and restore them on RSM.

That said the svm_{get,set}_nmi_mask will look something like:

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
index a9e9bfbffd72..08911a33cf1e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
@@ -3635,13 +3635,21 @@ static int svm_nmi_allowed(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool for_injection)

 static bool svm_get_nmi_mask(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 {
-       return to_svm(vcpu)->nmi_masked;
+       struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
+
+       if (is_vnmi_enabled(svm))
+               return svm->vmcb->control.int_ctl & V_NMI_MASK;
+       else
+               return svm->nmi_masked;
 }

 static void svm_set_nmi_mask(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool masked)
 {
        struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);

+       if (is_vnmi_enabled(svm))
+               return;
+
        if (masked) {
                svm->nmi_masked = true;
                svm_set_iret_intercept(svm);

is there any inputs on above approach?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220810061226.1286-4-santosh.shukla@amd.com/

>>> The first process_nmi() effectively exists to (a) purge nmi_queued and (b) keep
>>> nmi_pending if KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING is not set.  I think we can just
>>> replace that with an set of nmi_queued, i.e.
>>>
>>> 	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING) {
>>> 		vcpu->arch-nmi_pending = 0;	
>>> 		atomic_set(&vcpu->arch.nmi_queued, events->nmi.pending);
>>> 		process_nmi();
>>>
>> You mean replace above process_nmi() with kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu), right?
>> I'll try with above proposal.
> 
> Yep, if that works.  Actually, that might be a requirement.  There's a
> 
>   static_call(kvm_x86_set_nmi_mask)(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);
> 
> lurking below this.  Invoking process_nmi() before NMI blocking is updated could
> result in KVM incorrectly dropping/keeping NMIs.  I don't think it would be a
> problem in practice since KVM save only one NMI, but userspace could stuff NMIs.
> 
> Huh.  The the existing code is buggy.  events->nmi.pending is a u8, and
> arch.nmi_pending is an unsigned int.  KVM doesn't cap the incoming value, so
> userspace could set up to 255 pending NMIs.  The extra weird part is that the extra
> NMIs will get dropped the next time KVM stumbles through process_nmi().
> 
> Amusingly, KVM only saves one pending NMI, i.e. in a true migration scenario KVM
> may drop an NMI.
> 
>   events->nmi.pending = vcpu->arch.nmi_pending != 0;
> 
> The really amusing part is that that code was added by 7460fb4a3400 ("KVM: Fix
> simultaneous NMIs").  The only thing I can figure is that KVM_GET_VCPU_EVENTS was
> somewhat blindly updated without much thought about what should actually happen.
> 
> So, can you slide the below in early in the series?  Then in this series, convert
> to the above suggested flow (zero nmi_pending, stuff nmi_queued) in another patch?
> 
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 07:44:16 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Save/restore all NMIs when multiple NMIs are
>  pending
> 
> Save all pending NMIs in KVM_GET_VCPU_EVENTS, and queue KVM_REQ_NMI if one
> or more NMIs are pending after KVM_SET_VCPU_EVENTS in order to re-evaluate
> pending NMIs with respect to NMI blocking.
> 
> KVM allows multiple NMIs to be pending in order to faithfully emulate bare
> metal handling of simultaneous NMIs (on bare metal, truly simultaneous
> NMIs are impossible, i.e. one will always arrive first and be consumed).
> Support for simultaneous NMIs botched the save/restore though.  KVM only
> saves one pending NMI, but allows userspace to restore 255 pending NMIs
> as kvm_vcpu_events.nmi.pending is a u8, and KVM's internal state is stored
> in an unsigned int.
> 
> 7460fb4a3400 ("KVM: Fix simultaneous NMIs")
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 508074e47bc0..e9339acbf82a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -5115,7 +5115,7 @@ static void kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_get_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>  	events->interrupt.shadow = static_call(kvm_x86_get_interrupt_shadow)(vcpu);
>  
>  	events->nmi.injected = vcpu->arch.nmi_injected;
> -	events->nmi.pending = vcpu->arch.nmi_pending != 0;
> +	events->nmi.pending = vcpu->arch.nmi_pending;
>  	events->nmi.masked = static_call(kvm_x86_get_nmi_mask)(vcpu);
>  
>  	/* events->sipi_vector is never valid when reporting to user space */
> @@ -5202,8 +5202,11 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_set_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>  						events->interrupt.shadow);
>  
>  	vcpu->arch.nmi_injected = events->nmi.injected;
> -	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING)
> +	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING) {
>  		vcpu->arch.nmi_pending = events->nmi.pending;
> +		if (vcpu->arch.nmi_pending)
> +			kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu);
> +	}
>  	static_call(kvm_x86_set_nmi_mask)(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);
>  
>  	if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_SIPI_VECTOR &&
> 

Ok.

On top of the above, I am including your suggested change as below...

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index e0855599df65..437a6cea3bc7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -5201,9 +5201,9 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_set_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,

        vcpu->arch.nmi_injected = events->nmi.injected;
        if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING) {
-               vcpu->arch.nmi_pending = events->nmi.pending;
-               if (vcpu->arch.nmi_pending)
-                       kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu);
+               vcpu->arch.nmi_pending = 0;
+               atomic_set(&vcpu->arch.nmi_queued, events->nmi.pending);
+               kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu);
        }
        static_call(kvm_x86_set_nmi_mask)(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);

does that make sense?

> base-commit: 6c77ae716d546d71b21f0c9ee7d405314a3f3f9e


  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-14 10:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-29 19:37 [PATCH v2 00/11] SVM: vNMI (with my fixes) Maxim Levitsky
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] KVM: nSVM: don't sync back tlb_ctl on nested VM exit Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-05 14:05   ` Santosh Shukla
2022-12-06 12:13     ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] KVM: nSVM: clean up the copying of V_INTR bits from vmcb02 to vmcb12 Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-28  0:37   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-31  1:44     ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-24 14:38       ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-02-24 16:48         ` Sean Christopherson
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] KVM: nSVM: explicitly raise KVM_REQ_EVENT on nested VM exit if L1 doesn't intercept interrupts Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-28  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-30 18:41     ` Sean Christopherson
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] KVM: SVM: drop the SVM specific H_FLAGS Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-05 15:31   ` Santosh Shukla
2023-01-28  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] KVM: x86: emulator: stop using raw host flags Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-28  0:58   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-24 14:38     ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] KVM: SVM: add wrappers to enable/disable IRET interception Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-05 15:41   ` Santosh Shukla
2022-12-06 12:14     ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-08 12:09       ` Santosh Shukla
2022-12-08 13:44         ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-31 21:07           ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-13 14:50             ` Santosh Shukla
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] KVM: x86: add a delayed hardware NMI injection interface Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-28  1:09   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-31 21:12     ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-08  9:35       ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-08  9:32     ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-24 14:39     ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-31 22:28   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-01  0:06     ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-08  9:51       ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-08 16:09         ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-08  9:43     ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-08 16:06       ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-14 10:22         ` Santosh Shukla [this message]
2023-02-15 22:43           ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-16  0:22             ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-17  7:56               ` Santosh Shukla
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] x86/cpu: Add CPUID feature bit for VNMI Maxim Levitsky
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] KVM: SVM: Add VNMI bit definition Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-31 22:42   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-02  9:42     ` Santosh Shukla
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] KVM: SVM: implement support for vNMI Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-04 17:18   ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-05 17:07   ` Santosh Shukla
2023-01-28  1:10   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-10 12:02     ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-01  0:22   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-01  0:39     ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-10 12:24     ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-10 16:44       ` Sean Christopherson
2022-11-29 19:37 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] KVM: nSVM: implement support for nested VNMI Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-05 17:14   ` Santosh Shukla
2022-12-06 12:19     ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-08 12:11       ` Santosh Shukla
2023-02-01  0:44   ` Sean Christopherson
2022-12-06  9:58 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] SVM: vNMI (with my fixes) Santosh Shukla
2023-02-01  0:24   ` Sean Christopherson
2022-12-20 10:27 ` Maxim Levitsky
2022-12-21 18:44   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-15  9:05 ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-01-28  1:13 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-01 19:13 ` Sean Christopherson

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=2b5994e2-15ba-dd57-285c-fb33827a5275@amd.com \
    --to=santosh.shukla@amd.com \
    --cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jiaxi.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jing2.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
    --cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wyes.karny@amd.com \
    --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®