Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753628AbdGSQZL (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:25:11 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:36181 "EHLO mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753513AbdGSQZJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:25:09 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: VMX: Fix invalid guest state detection after task-switch emulation From: Nadav Amit In-Reply-To: <20170719161952.GC17303@potion> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 09:25:06 -0700 Cc: Wanpeng Li , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , kvm , Paolo Bonzini , Wanpeng Li Message-Id: References: <1499757180-20439-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> <20170719112926.GA13502@potion> <20170719161952.GC17303@potion> To: =?utf-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id v6JGPGSC010464 Content-Length: 3258 Lines: 85 Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-07-19 08:14-0700, Nadav Amit: >> Radim Krčmář wrote: >>> @@ -2363,6 +2368,8 @@ static unsigned long vmx_get_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>> >>> static void vmx_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags) >>> { >>> + unsigned long old_rflags = to_vmx(vcpu)->rflags; >> >> It assumes rflags was decached from the VMCS before. Probably it is true, but… > > Right, it's better to use accessors everywhere, thanks. > The line should read: > > + unsigned long old_rflags = vmx_get_rflags(vcpu); > > ---8<--- > This can be reproduced by EPT=1, unrestricted_guest=N, emulate_invalid_state=Y > or EPT=0, the trace of kvm-unit-tests/taskswitch2.flat is like below, it > tries to emulate invalid guest state task-switch: > > kvm_exit: reason TASK_SWITCH rip 0x0 info 40000058 0 > kvm_emulate_insn: 42000:0:0f 0b (0x2) > kvm_emulate_insn: 42000:0:0f 0b (0x2) failed > kvm_inj_exception: #UD (0x0) > kvm_entry: vcpu 0 > kvm_exit: reason TASK_SWITCH rip 0x0 info 40000058 0 > kvm_emulate_insn: 42000:0:0f 0b (0x2) > kvm_emulate_insn: 42000:0:0f 0b (0x2) failed > kvm_inj_exception: #UD (0x0) > > It appears that the task-switch emulation updates rflags (and vm86 flag) > only after the segments are loaded, causing vmx->emulation_required to > be set, when in fact invalid guest state emulation is not needed. > > This patch fixes it by updating vmx->emulation_required after the rflags > (and vm86 flag) is updated. > > Suggested-by: Nadav Amit > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > [Wanpeng wrote the commit message with initial patch and Radim moved the > update to vmx_set_rflags and added Paolo's suggestion for the check.] > Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář > --- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 15 ++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > index 84e62acf2dd8..a776aea0043a 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > @@ -2326,6 +2326,11 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > __vmx_load_host_state(to_vmx(vcpu)); > } > > +static bool emulation_required(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + return emulate_invalid_guest_state && !guest_state_valid(vcpu); > +} > + > static void vmx_decache_cr0_guest_bits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > > /* > @@ -2363,6 +2368,8 @@ static unsigned long vmx_get_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > static void vmx_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags) > { > + unsigned long old_rflags = vmx_get_rflags(vcpu); > + > __set_bit(VCPU_EXREG_RFLAGS, (ulong *)&vcpu->arch.regs_avail); > to_vmx(vcpu)->rflags = rflags; > if (to_vmx(vcpu)->rmode.vm86_active) { > @@ -2370,6 +2377,9 @@ static void vmx_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags) > rflags |= X86_EFLAGS_IOPL | X86_EFLAGS_VM; > } > vmcs_writel(GUEST_RFLAGS, rflags); > + > + if ((old_rflags ^ rflags) & X86_EFLAGS_VM) > + to_vmx(vcpu)->emulation_required = emulation_required(vcpu); Sorry for not pointing it before, but here you compare the old_rflags with the new rflags but after you already “massaged” it. So the value you compare with is not what the guest “sees”.