From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio: Get/put KVM only for the first/last vfio_df_open/close in cdev path
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 18:30:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fddd5230-28ac-463b-8536-ee953072d973@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BN9PR11MB5276059EAED001D833949DF88CD32@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 2024/7/1 16:43, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Zhao, Yan Y <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 11:19 PM
>>
>> In the device cdev path, adjust the handling of the KVM reference count to
>> only increment with the first vfio_df_open() and decrement after the final
>> vfio_df_close(). This change addresses a KVM reference leak that occurs
>> when a device cdev file is opened multiple times and attempts to bind to
>> iommufd repeatedly.
>>
>> Currently, vfio_df_get_kvm_safe() is invoked prior to each vfio_df_open()
>> in the cdev path during iommufd binding. The corresponding
>> vfio_device_put_kvm() is executed either when iommufd is unbound or if an
>> error occurs during the binding process.
>>
>> However, issues arise when a device binds to iommufd more than once. The
>> second vfio_df_open() will fail during iommufd binding, and
>> vfio_device_put_kvm() will be triggered, setting device->kvm to NULL.
>> Consequently, when iommufd is unbound from the first successfully bound
>> device, vfio_device_put_kvm() becomes ineffective, leading to a leak in the
>> KVM reference count.
>
> To be accurate this happens only when two binds are issued via different
> fds otherwise below check will happen earlier when two binds are in a
> same fd:
>
> /* one device cannot be bound twice */
> if (df->access_granted) {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
yes
>>
>> Below is the calltrace that will be produced in this scenario when the KVM
>> module is unloaded afterwards, reporting "BUG kvm_vcpu (Tainted: G S):
>> Objects remaining in kvm_vcpu on __kmem_cache_shutdown()".
>>
>> Call Trace:
>> <TASK>
>> dump_stack_lvl+0x80/0xc0
>> slab_err+0xb0/0xf0
>> ? __kmem_cache_shutdown+0xc1/0x4e0
>> ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0x50
>> ? lock_acquired+0x144/0x3c0
>> __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x1b7/0x4e0
>> kmem_cache_destroy+0xa6/0x260
>> kvm_exit+0x80/0xc0 [kvm]
>> vmx_exit+0xe/0x20 [kvm_intel]
>> __x64_sys_delete_module+0x143/0x250
>> ? ktime_get_coarse_real_ts64+0xd3/0xe0
>> ? syscall_trace_enter+0x143/0x210
>> do_syscall_64+0x6f/0x140
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
>>
>> Fixes: 5fcc26969a16 ("vfio: Add VFIO_DEVICE_BIND_IOMMUFD")
>> Signed-off-by: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/vfio/device_cdev.c | 13 +++++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/device_cdev.c b/drivers/vfio/device_cdev.c
>> index bb1817bd4ff3..3b85d01d1b27 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/device_cdev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/device_cdev.c
>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ long vfio_df_ioctl_bind_iommufd(struct
>> vfio_device_file *df,
>> {
>> struct vfio_device *device = df->device;
>> struct vfio_device_bind_iommufd bind;
>> + bool put_kvm = false;
>> unsigned long minsz;
>> int ret;
>>
>> @@ -101,12 +102,15 @@ long vfio_df_ioctl_bind_iommufd(struct
>> vfio_device_file *df,
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> - * Before the device open, get the KVM pointer currently
>> + * Before the device's first open, get the KVM pointer currently
>> * associated with the device file (if there is) and obtain
>> - * a reference. This reference is held until device closed.
>> + * a reference. This reference is held until device's last closed.
>> * Save the pointer in the device for use by drivers.
>> */
>> - vfio_df_get_kvm_safe(df);
>> + if (device->open_count == 0) {
>> + vfio_df_get_kvm_safe(df);
>> + put_kvm = true;
>> + }
>>
>> ret = vfio_df_open(df);
>> if (ret)
>> @@ -129,7 +133,8 @@ long vfio_df_ioctl_bind_iommufd(struct
>> vfio_device_file *df,
>> out_close_device:
>> vfio_df_close(df);
>> out_put_kvm:
>> - vfio_device_put_kvm(device);
>> + if (put_kvm)
>> + vfio_device_put_kvm(device);
>> iommufd_ctx_put(df->iommufd);
>> df->iommufd = NULL;
>> out_unlock:
>>
>
> what about extending vfio_df_open() to unify the get/put_kvm()
> and open_count trick in one place?
>
> int vfio_df_open(struct vfio_device_file *df, struct kvm *kvm,
> spinlock_t *kvm_ref_lock)
> {
this should work. But need a comment to note why need pass in both kvm
and kvm_ref_lock given df has both of them. :)
> struct vfio_device *device = df->device;
> int ret = 0;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&device->dev_set->lock);
>
> if (device->open_count == 0) {
> spin_lock(kvm_ref_lock);
> vfio_device_get_kvm_safe(device, kvm);
> spin_unlock(kvm_ref_lock);
> }
perhaps it can be put in the "if (device->open_count == 1)" branch, just
before invoking vfio_df_device_first_open().
>
> /*
> * Only the group path allows the device to be opened multiple
> * times. The device cdev path doesn't have a secure way for it.
> */
> if (device->open_count != 0 && !df->group)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> device->open_count++;
> if (device->open_count == 1) {
> ret = vfio_df_device_first_open(df);
> if (ret)
> device->open_count--;
> }
>
> if (ret)
> vfio_device_put_kvm(device);
> return ret;
> }
>
> void vfio_df_close(struct vfio_device_file *df)
> {
> struct vfio_device *device = df->device;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&device->dev_set->lock);
>
> vfio_assert_device_open(device);
> if (device->open_count == 1) {
> vfio_df_device_last_close(df);
> vfio_device_put_kvm(device);
> }
> device->open_count--;
> }
--
Regards,
Yi Liu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-01 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-28 15:18 Yan Zhao
2024-07-01 5:08 ` Yi Liu
2024-07-01 5:42 ` Yan Zhao
2024-07-01 6:01 ` Yi Liu
2024-07-01 8:43 ` Tian, Kevin
2024-07-01 10:30 ` Yi Liu [this message]
2024-07-01 12:02 ` Yan Zhao
2024-07-02 0:17 ` Tian, Kevin
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=fddd5230-28ac-463b-8536-ee953072d973@intel.com \
--to=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.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®