DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 37A3B7EBD7
From: Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
To: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: nVMX: Emulate EPTP switching for the L1 hypervisor
References: <20170710204936.4001-1-bsd@redhat.com>
        <20170710204936.4001-4-bsd@redhat.com>
        <2d50ebc4-9328-ce08-b55b-6a331ee13cc3@redhat.com>
        <jpgy3ruam9i.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy>
        <jpg1spmsugn.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy> <20170711193235.GE3326@potion>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:50:36 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20170711193235.GE3326@potion> ("Radim \=\?utf-8\?B\?S3LEjW3DocWZ\?\=
 \=\?utf-8\?B\?Iidz\?\= message of "Tue,
        11 Jul 2017 21:32:36 +0200")
Message-ID: <jpgd1964usz.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2918
Lines: 76

Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> writes:

> 2017-07-11 14:24-0400, Bandan Das:
>> Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com> writes:
>> > If there's a triple fault, I think it's a good idea to inject it
>> > back. Basically, there's no need to take care of damage control
>> > that L1 is intentionally doing.
>> >
>> >>> +			goto fail;
>> >>> +		kvm_mmu_unload(vcpu);
>> >>> +		vmcs12->ept_pointer = address;
>> >>> +		kvm_mmu_reload(vcpu);
>> >>
>> >> I was thinking about something like this:
>> >>
>> >> kvm_mmu_unload(vcpu);
>> >> old = vmcs12->ept_pointer;
>> >> vmcs12->ept_pointer = address;
>> >> if (kvm_mmu_reload(vcpu)) {
>> >> 	/* pointer invalid, restore previous state */
>> >> 	kvm_clear_request(KVM_REQ_TRIPLE_FAULT, vcpu);
>> >> 	vmcs12->ept_pointer = old;
>> >> 	kvm_mmu_reload(vcpu);
>> >> 	goto fail;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> The you can inherit the checks from mmu_check_root().
>> 
>> Actually, thinking about this a bit more, I agree with you. Any fault
>> with a vmfunc operation should end with a vmfunc vmexit, so this
>> is a good thing to have. Thank you for this idea! :)
>
> SDM says
>
>   IF tent_EPTP is not a valid EPTP value (would cause VM entry to fail
>   if in EPTP) THEN VMexit;

This section here:
As noted in Section 25.5.5.2, an execution of the
EPTP-switching VM function that causes a VM exit (as specified
above), uses the basic exit reason 59, indicating “VMFUNC”.
The length of the VMFUNC instruction is saved into the
VM-exit instruction-length field. No additional VM-exit
information is provided.

Although, it adds (as specified above), from testing, any vmexit that
happens as a result of the execution of the vmfunc instruction always
has exit reason 59.

IMO, the case David pointed out comes under "as a result of the
execution of the vmfunc instruction", so I would prefer exiting
with reason 59.

> and no other mentions of a VM exit, so I think that the VM exit happens
> only under these conditions:
>
>   — The EPT memory type (bits 2:0) must be a value supported by the
>     processor as indicated in the IA32_VMX_EPT_VPID_CAP MSR (see
>     Appendix A.10).
>   — Bits 5:3 (1 less than the EPT page-walk length) must be 3, indicating
>     an EPT page-walk length of 4; see Section 28.2.2.
>   — Bit 6 (enable bit for accessed and dirty flags for EPT) must be 0 if
>     bit 21 of the IA32_VMX_EPT_VPID_CAP MSR (see Appendix A.10) is read
>     as 0, indicating that the processor does not support accessed and
>     dirty flags for EPT.
>   — Reserved bits 11:7 and 63:N (where N is the processor’s
>     physical-address width) must all be 0.
>
> And it looks like we need parts of nested_ept_init_mmu_context() to
> properly handle VMX_EPT_AD_ENABLE_BIT.

I completely ignored AD and the #VE sections. I will add a TODO item
in the comment section.

> The KVM_REQ_TRIPLE_FAULT can be handled by kvm_mmu_reload in vcpu_run if
> we just invalidate the MMU.