Message ID | 20240726235234.228822-7-seanjc@google.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Handled Elsewhere, archived |
Headers | show
Return-Path: <linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org> X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@legolas.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=Li9d6S3r; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org (client-ip=112.213.38.117; helo=lists.ozlabs.org; envelope-from=linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org; receiver=patchwork.ozlabs.org) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by legolas.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WW4Rk5rcTz1ybY for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2024 09:57:06 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=Li9d6S3r; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4WW4Rk4q9nz3fpZ for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2024 09:57:06 +1000 (AEST) X-Original-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=Li9d6S3r; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1149; helo=mail-yw1-x1149.google.com; envelope-from=30takzgykdaw4qmzvos00sxq.o0yxuz6911o-pq7xu454.0bxmn4.03s@flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mail-yw1-x1149.google.com (mail-yw1-x1149.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1149]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WW4Lr6VTwz3dSp for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2024 09:52:52 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-yw1-x1149.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6688c44060fso6462447b3.2 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:52:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1722037970; x=1722642770; darn=lists.ozlabs.org; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:reply-to:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=VnEAHRC1zG591I39OowzIjQNXTqQsRDXyh/rUn6sicQ=; b=Li9d6S3rvQP3E27cOdmJJ7fUIRSyESODDTywD7LDAk4/hnGL2iU0NGJxoLsxtBRicI c0yl5GcU3lZvCCjJMG1GUWHC4oe79uToVjp1KwxefNO4HTnOHYlU2u4b1LMOfU4g6jp5 eUZVvyz82ety83CkPaz4gPQJykzPpamO+cqSxe8t+nPu2JbrNdP0x97PUZdbZfwiCATh OHfJvB0/Lj581n2YDVUpK9DO04nLj49OwgSKmXBXtwIaso8/Zu7hHBuYnhqglpUR7wCh bHkFSVW75ZCBDZ4zcFrsCU0ZuoTktTWFS1Iqj+JiXW8ApMrbU4RToPc5VFPOlYkG1uOp yaLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722037970; x=1722642770; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:reply-to:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=VnEAHRC1zG591I39OowzIjQNXTqQsRDXyh/rUn6sicQ=; b=ZvJIl4ZtMGSKIXV/bgy0qWw/qENbBbTjcEsrnTRdsNTBYh5iPzUsfgbdRyF8zdJKZl xRFAqg9hXkdIUnV7RxdJN9USDzOH8trz9eXe8JHiajK1EgkJ5N6UXEh0QblVjjvqJkg+ 5LwJShQM0K6ch1kCmU4efcK79e08fo0V3evw0N2xQtZUGvl1ja0gPxAcDzoGl1X/g5wI eGerr8QNZnD/Dk7qja0yQYYhrxGKBqOdNdd/fdqYENGjKiyPF8KqRoCeKxA8sw/vI3xp 7yLzUnqCFiMmUTZ4gOjbfmoBfKQubMbYPbJ63flT6NHdKPkVM7y7BlPuuhFdhNM/FSgL Jh+Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV04TCSTMaXIHJGqtbaExBCiv74O/qKe/OpBMnmUabkCVW46fwe+qYx2aMs2SmyLf323xMg7+T0f8FQKhb7kdPTzrCu+dkn+Lu/XPpbjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzSFmcIdWUVNw7FNGqMHsRAhn5e5V5dzhXEqcfeaLpcbLE2Ssif wPDLi6toM6jxY/l0IJGG4xhqvsu7WzwSNrsQUsjUve5uz14OoNfoAA1YJCznWYoT3Iw85o3+VxW qhg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFPOoUYsYyJmRjA25F0UYC9yeYKs61mDA/QqS/vgTcAgpqjjzQfUfGqPl0MU2c7vZElDBuLLOtKUts= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a05:690c:fc9:b0:648:afcb:a7ce with SMTP id 00721157ae682-67a05a9d90bmr269367b3.3.1722037969718; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:52:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:51:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20240726235234.228822-1-seanjc@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20240726235234.228822-1-seanjc@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.46.0.rc1.232.g9752f9e123-goog Message-ID: <20240726235234.228822-7-seanjc@google.com> Subject: [PATCH v12 06/84] KVM: x86/mmu: Skip the "try unsync" path iff the old SPTE was a leaf SPTE From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>, Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@loongson.cn>, Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>, Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>, <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org> List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>, <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> Cc: kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>, David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>, loongarch@lists.linux.dev, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" <linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org> |
Series |
KVM: Stop grabbing references to PFNMAP'd pages
|
expand
|
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c index d4527965e48c..a3baf0cadbee 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c @@ -226,12 +226,20 @@ bool make_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, spte |= PT_WRITABLE_MASK | shadow_mmu_writable_mask; /* - * Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash - * lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection - * is responsibility of kvm_mmu_get_page / kvm_mmu_sync_roots. - * Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. + * When overwriting an existing leaf SPTE, and the old SPTE was + * writable, skip trying to unsync shadow pages as any relevant + * shadow pages must already be unsync, i.e. the hash lookup is + * unnecessary (and expensive). + * + * The same reasoning applies to dirty page/folio accounting; + * KVM will mark the folio dirty using the old SPTE, thus + * there's no need to immediately mark the new SPTE as dirty. + * + * Note, both cases rely on KVM not changing PFNs without first + * zapping the old SPTE, which is guaranteed by both the shadow + * MMU and the TDP MMU. */ - if (is_writable_pte(old_spte)) + if (is_last_spte(old_spte, level) && is_writable_pte(old_spte)) goto out; /*
Apply make_spte()'s optimization to skip trying to unsync shadow pages if and only if the old SPTE was a leaf SPTE, as non-leaf SPTEs in direct MMUs are always writable, i.e. could trigger a false positive and incorrectly lead to KVM creating a SPTE without write-protecting or marking shadow pages unsync. This bug only affects the TDP MMU, as the shadow MMU only overwrites a shadow-present SPTE when synchronizing SPTEs (and only 4KiB SPTEs can be unsync). Specifically, mmu_set_spte() drops any non-leaf SPTEs *before* calling make_spte(), whereas the TDP MMU can do a direct replacement of a page table with the leaf SPTE. Opportunistically update the comment to explain why skipping the unsync stuff is safe, as opposed to simply saying "it's someone else's problem". Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> --- arch/x86/kvm/mmu/spte.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)