Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp4291529ybl; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:06:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyzZVWtficsbqmm3sM9z8OKS/Ykj8IcfeXGqA+95ARppydSx6AGxYakW/nb0sS6nxya3HDD X-Received: by 2002:a9d:60c4:: with SMTP id b4mr14171217otk.166.1578942410617; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:06:50 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1578942410; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=GhsAaOPOAJaGEeuAq1+TPVdosZZY4sLdDlqzeiuSWEBjCKR6AJJ/d0CzICR++Sugdh BIDBr6dbVbFvw9jMbzudFqFo6zinWGd6Q3jckjdQrwcimVFuIHKV8SRtQcShwTHgOssa akJ/LpV4/kLmH7ldr+AMa72dqjsg596qFe3fl9dGcufnOpgtHxbmkF1iKCu+u5neLSQx rZexSKWqRHqgDvlHygfzkziQM+LXCj8xGboCjLBnwikmJwum0FDu6xgFittIoYqce9z2 Ec6iRpIyEOaxEc3ZeECmgnciLcRJrTqBiN2024iA2MDLLcupIyeQgQJ8xGg/B2AxJSPA wDgg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:cc:to:subject :from; bh=yc8jagBlWS9YS25wtg33PxaxACxBLI+7f0/zw7rCmqM=; b=r1KjVwNCczTzRFcfdmGl2QvAIiDJb+wFM/8RSKVJM0lH8oUK5osqHUhIr4tpHg5l5F 94VKzpTXLVQNlYzU0bmnXVs6C5v8nl6XA9YyXHnKL0lO/76fCoZWCsMHMgfR4X7Je0+/ nuv+AOXHKeeEsFLxgP+ZlwKhhVoqsdhA+aQLFIfIMLHHHrFc36QonAHId3p5NKMjzycO Oryw+aS/tGdJhoXaPN+0utB/1Nc7RxxaTYot59Qw8hRDpRvv53Vk394AtBc9DogJS2Ht ebi360VsEP4OlfKQbtL0nJabGaxPu97g7Q4eFYOOIc6JWGGMzhmH3vzPAe4t6n4dbg8i 6HaQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=bitdefender.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s18si7387157otr.172.2020.01.13.11.06.35; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:06:50 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=bitdefender.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728689AbgAMTFg (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:05:36 -0500 Received: from mx01.bbu.dsd.mx.bitdefender.com ([91.199.104.161]:35650 "EHLO mx01.bbu.dsd.mx.bitdefender.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726435AbgAMTFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:05:36 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 614 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 14:05:34 EST Received: from smtp.bitdefender.com (smtp02.buh.bitdefender.net [10.17.80.76]) by mx01.bbu.dsd.mx.bitdefender.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B93A30747C7; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:55:19 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost (unknown [195.210.5.22]) by smtp.bitdefender.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A256301B92B; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:55:19 +0200 (EET) From: Adalbert =?iso-8859-2?b?TGF643I=?= Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v10 06/10] vmx: spp: Set up SPP paging table at vmentry/vmexit To: Sean Christopherson , Yang Weijiang Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, jmattson@google.com, yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com, edwin.zhai@intel.com, tamas@tklengyel.com, mathieu.tarral@protonmail.com In-Reply-To: <20200113173358.GC1175@linux.intel.com> References: <20200102061319.10077-1-weijiang.yang@intel.com> <20200102061319.10077-7-weijiang.yang@intel.com> <20200110180458.GG21485@linux.intel.com> <20200113081050.GF12253@local-michael-cet-test.sh.intel.com> <20200113173358.GC1175@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:55:46 +0200 Message-ID: <15789417460.A97E650.22893@host> User-agent: void Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 09:33:58 -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 04:10:50PM +0800, Yang Weijiang wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:04:59AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 02:13:15PM +0800, Yang Weijiang wrote: > > > > @@ -3585,7 +3602,30 @@ static bool fast_page_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t gva, int level, > > > > if ((error_code & PFERR_WRITE_MASK) && > > > > spte_can_locklessly_be_made_writable(spte)) > > > > { > > > > - new_spte |= PT_WRITABLE_MASK; > > > > + /* > > > > + * Record write protect fault caused by > > > > + * Sub-page Protection, let VMI decide > > > > + * the next step. > > > > + */ > > > > + if (spte & PT_SPP_MASK) { > > > > + int len = kvm_x86_ops->get_inst_len(vcpu); > > > > > > There's got to be a better way to handle SPP exits than adding a helper > > > to retrieve the instruction length. > > > > > The fault instruction was skipped by kvm_skip_emulated_instruction() > > before, but Paolo suggested leave the re-do or skip option to user-space > > to make it flexible for write protection or write tracking, so return > > length to user-space. > > Sorry, my comment was unclear. I have no objection to punting the fault > to userspace, it's the mechanics of how it's done that I dislike. > > Specifically, (a) using run->exit_reason to propagate the SPP exit up the > stack, e.g. instead of modifying affected call stacks to play nice with > any exit to userspace, (b) assuming ->get_insn_len() will always be > accurate, e.g. see the various caveats in skip_emulated_instruction() for > both VMX and SVM, and (c) duplicating the state capture code in every > location that can encounter a SPP fault. > > What I'm hoping is that it's possible to modify the call stacks to > explicitly propagate an exit to userspace and/or SPP fault, and shove all > the state capture into a common location, e.g. handle_ept_violation(). > > Side topic, assuming the userspace VMI is going to be instrospecting the > faulting instruction, won't it decode the instruction? I.e. calculate > the instruction length anyways? Indeed, we decode the instruction from userspace. I don't know if the instruction length helps other projects. Added Tamas and Mathieu. In our last VMI API proposal, the breakpoint event had the instruction length sent to userspace, but I can't remember why. https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20190809160047.8319-62-alazar@bitdefender.com/