Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752707AbdDCMKs (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 08:10:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50987 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752194AbdDCMKf (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 08:10:35 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com CB0404E02B Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com CB0404E02B Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: mmu: Fix overlap with private memslots To: Wanpeng Li , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org References: <1490595800-15060-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> Cc: Paolo Bonzini , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Wanpeng Li , Dmitry Vyukov , Alex Williamson , "# v3 . 10+" From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 14:10:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1490595800-15060-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Mon, 03 Apr 2017 12:10:35 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3777 Lines: 122 On 27.03.2017 08:23, Wanpeng Li wrote: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Reported by syzkaller: > > pte_list_remove: ffff9714eb1f8078 0->BUG > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > kernel BUG at arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c:1157! > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP > RIP: 0010:pte_list_remove+0x11b/0x120 [kvm] > Call Trace: > drop_spte+0x83/0xb0 [kvm] > mmu_page_zap_pte+0xcc/0xe0 [kvm] > kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page+0x81/0x4a0 [kvm] > kvm_mmu_invalidate_zap_all_pages+0x159/0x220 [kvm] > kvm_arch_flush_shadow_all+0xe/0x10 [kvm] > kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x6c/0xa0 [kvm] > ? kvm_mmu_notifier_release+0x5/0xa0 [kvm] > __mmu_notifier_release+0x79/0x110 > ? __mmu_notifier_release+0x5/0x110 > exit_mmap+0x15a/0x170 > ? do_exit+0x281/0xcb0 > mmput+0x66/0x160 > do_exit+0x2c9/0xcb0 > ? __context_tracking_exit.part.5+0x4a/0x150 > do_group_exit+0x50/0xd0 > SyS_exit_group+0x14/0x20 > do_syscall_64+0x73/0x1f0 > entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25 > > The reason is that when creates new memslot, there is no guarantee for new > memslot not overlap with private memslots. This can be triggered by the > following program: > > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > > long r[16]; > > int main() > { > void *p = valloc(0x4000); > > r[2] = open("/dev/kvm", 0); > r[3] = ioctl(r[2], KVM_CREATE_VM, 0x0ul); > > uint64_t addr = 0xf000; > ioctl(r[3], KVM_SET_IDENTITY_MAP_ADDR, &addr); > r[6] = ioctl(r[3], KVM_CREATE_VCPU, 0x0ul); > ioctl(r[3], KVM_SET_TSS_ADDR, 0x0ul); > ioctl(r[6], KVM_RUN, 0); > ioctl(r[6], KVM_RUN, 0); > > struct kvm_userspace_memory_region mr = { > .slot = 0, > .flags = KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES, > .guest_phys_addr = 0xf000, > .memory_size = 0x4000, > .userspace_addr = (uintptr_t) p > }; > ioctl(r[3], KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, &mr); > return 0; > } > > This bug is caused by 'commit 5419369ed6bd ("KVM: Fix user memslot overlap > check")' which removes the check to avoid to add new memslot who overlaps > with private memslots. This patch fixes it by not add new memslot if it > is also overlap with private memslots. > > Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov > Cc: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Dmitry Vyukov > Cc: Alex Williamson > Cc: # v3.10+ > Fixes: 5419369ed (KVM: Fix user memslot overlap check) > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > --- > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index a17d787..ddeb18a 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -978,8 +978,7 @@ int __kvm_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm, > /* Check for overlaps */ > r = -EEXIST; > kvm_for_each_memslot(slot, __kvm_memslots(kvm, as_id)) { > - if ((slot->id >= KVM_USER_MEM_SLOTS) || > - (slot->id == id)) > + if (slot->id == id) > continue; > if (!((base_gfn + npages <= slot->base_gfn) || > (base_gfn >= slot->base_gfn + slot->npages))) > I wonder why the orginal patch explicitly mentions "Prior to memory slot sorting this loop compared all of the user memory slots... and skip comparison to private slots.". Was/is there some use case where this was intended to work? -- Thanks, David