Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 15:22:11 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, andreyknvl@google.com,
        dvyukov@google.com, marc.zyngier@arm.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,
        ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kvm: arm/arm64: Fix locking for kvm_free_stage2_pgd
Message-ID: <20170403142211.GE18905@leverpostej>
References: <1491228763-23450-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1491228763-23450-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2759
Lines: 79

Hi,

On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:12:43PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> In kvm_free_stage2_pgd() we don't hold the kvm->mmu_lock while calling
> unmap_stage2_range() on the entire memory range for the guest. This could
> cause problems with other callers (e.g, munmap on a memslot) trying to
> unmap a range. And since we have to unmap the entire Guest memory range
> holding a spinlock, make sure we yield the lock if necessary, after we
> unmap each PUD range.
> 
> Fixes: commit d5d8184d35c9 ("KVM: ARM: Memory virtualization setup")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.10+
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzin@redhat.com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> [ Avoid vCPU starvation and lockup detector warnings ]
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> 
> ---
> Changes since V2:
>  - Restrict kvm->mmu_lock relaxation to bigger ranges in unmap_stage2_range(),
>    to avoid possible issues like [0]
> 
>  [0] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-March/498210.html

Sorry if I'm being thick, but how does restricting this to a larger
range help with the "sleeping function called from invalid context"
issue?

Surely that just makes it rarer?

Thanks,
Mark.

> 
> Changes since V1:
>  - Yield the kvm->mmu_lock if necessary in unmap_stage2_range to prevent
>    vCPU starvation and lockup detector warnings.
> ---
>  arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> index 13b9c1f..db94f3a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -292,8 +292,15 @@ static void unmap_stage2_range(struct kvm *kvm, phys_addr_t start, u64 size)
>  	phys_addr_t addr = start, end = start + size;
>  	phys_addr_t next;
>  
> +	assert_spin_locked(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>  	pgd = kvm->arch.pgd + stage2_pgd_index(addr);
>  	do {
> +		/*
> +		 * If the range is too large, release the kvm->mmu_lock
> +		 * to prevent starvation and lockup detector warnings.
> +		 */
> +		if (size > S2_PUD_SIZE)
> +			cond_resched_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>  		next = stage2_pgd_addr_end(addr, end);
>  		if (!stage2_pgd_none(*pgd))
>  			unmap_stage2_puds(kvm, pgd, addr, next);
> @@ -831,7 +838,10 @@ void kvm_free_stage2_pgd(struct kvm *kvm)
>  	if (kvm->arch.pgd == NULL)
>  		return;
>  
> +	spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
>  	unmap_stage2_range(kvm, 0, KVM_PHYS_SIZE);
> +	spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
> +
>  	/* Free the HW pgd, one page at a time */
>  	free_pages_exact(kvm->arch.pgd, S2_PGD_SIZE);
>  	kvm->arch.pgd = NULL;
> -- 
> 2.7.4
>