Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: arm/arm64: Take mmap_sem in stage2_unmap_vm
To: Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
References: <1489503154-20705-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <1489503154-20705-2-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <20170315091755.GL1277@cbox>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, andreyknvl@google.com,
        dvyukov@google.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org,
        kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kcc@google.com,
        syzkaller@googlegroups.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Organization: ARM Ltd
Message-ID: <e005fa59-053f-caa6-17bd-0b57f5ba0670@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:34:53 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170315091755.GL1277@cbox>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1839
Lines: 60

On 15/03/17 09:17, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:52:32PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>>
>> We don't hold the mmap_sem while searching for the VMAs when
>> we try to unmap each memslot for a VM. Fix this properly to
>> avoid unexpected results.
>>
>> Fixes: commit 957db105c997 ("arm/arm64: KVM: Introduce stage2_unmap_vm")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.19+
>> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> index 962616f..f2e2e0c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -803,6 +803,7 @@ void stage2_unmap_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
>>  	int idx;
>>  
>>  	idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->srcu);
>> +	down_read(&current->mm->mmap_sem);
>>  	spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>>  
>>  	slots = kvm_memslots(kvm);
>> @@ -810,6 +811,7 @@ void stage2_unmap_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
>>  		stage2_unmap_memslot(kvm, memslot);
>>  
>>  	spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>> +	up_read(&current->mm->mmap_sem);
>>  	srcu_read_unlock(&kvm->srcu, idx);
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.7.4
>>
> 
> Are we sure that holding mmu_lock is valid while holding the mmap_sem?

Maybe I'm just confused by the many levels of locking, Here's my rational:

- kvm->srcu protects the memslot list
- mmap_sem protects the kernel VMA list
- mmu_lock protects the stage2 page tables (at least here)

I don't immediately see any issue with holding the mmap_sem mutex here
(unless there is a path that would retrigger a down operation on the
mmap_sem?).

Or am I missing something obvious?

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...