From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: SVM: Revert clearing of C-bit on GPA in #NPF handler
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 08:26:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5343d7c5-4cc7-91a1-d92c-2cf88855b104@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210625020354.431829-3-seanjc@google.com>
On 6/24/21 9:03 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Don't clear the C-bit in the #NPF handler, as it is a legal GPA bit for
> non-SEV guests, and for SEV guests the C-bit is dropped before the GPA
> hits the NPT in hardware. Clearing the bit for non-SEV guests causes KVM
> to mishandle #NPFs with that collide with the host's C-bit.
>
> Although the APM doesn't explicitly state that the C-bit is not reserved
> for non-SEV, Tom Lendacky confirmed that the following snippet about the
> effective reduction due to the C-bit does indeed apply only to SEV guests.
>
> Note that because guest physical addresses are always translated
> through the nested page tables, the size of the guest physical address
> space is not impacted by any physical address space reduction indicated
> in CPUID 8000_001F[EBX]. If the C-bit is a physical address bit however,
> the guest physical address space is effectively reduced by 1 bit.
>
> And for SEV guests, the APM clearly states that the bit is dropped before
> walking the nested page tables.
>
> If the C-bit is an address bit, this bit is masked from the guest
> physical address when it is translated through the nested page tables.
> Consequently, the hypervisor does not need to be aware of which pages
> the guest has chosen to mark private.
>
> Note, the bogus C-bit clearing was removed from legacy #PF handler in
> commit 6d1b867d0456 ("KVM: SVM: Don't strip the C-bit from CR2 on #PF
> interception").
>
> Fixes: 0ede79e13224 ("KVM: SVM: Clear C-bit from the page fault address")
> Cc: Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
> Cc: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Yep, definitely wasn't correct to be using an SME based macro on a guest
address. And as the APM states, the encryption bit is stripped for SEV
guests, so looks correct to me.
Acked-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> index 8834822c00cd..ca5614a48b21 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> @@ -1923,7 +1923,7 @@ static int npf_interception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>
> - u64 fault_address = __sme_clr(svm->vmcb->control.exit_info_2);
> + u64 fault_address = svm->vmcb->control.exit_info_2;
> u64 error_code = svm->vmcb->control.exit_info_1;
>
> trace_kvm_page_fault(fault_address, error_code);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-25 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-25 2:03 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: SVM: Final C-bit fixes? Sean Christopherson
2021-06-25 2:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] Revert "KVM: x86: Truncate reported guest MAXPHYADDR to C-bit if SEV is supported" Sean Christopherson
2021-06-25 13:28 ` Tom Lendacky
2021-06-25 2:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: SVM: Revert clearing of C-bit on GPA in #NPF handler Sean Christopherson
2021-06-25 13:26 ` Tom Lendacky [this message]
2021-07-08 16:30 ` [PATCH 0/2] KVM: SVM: Final C-bit fixes? Paolo Bonzini
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=5343d7c5-4cc7-91a1-d92c-2cf88855b104@amd.com \
--to=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pgonda@google.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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®