Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210424004645.3950558-1-seanjc@google.com> <20210424004645.3950558-7-seanjc@google.com>
 <CAAeT=FzS0bP_7_wz6G6cL8-7pudTD7fhavLCVsOE0KnPXf99dQ@mail.gmail.com> <YKQiTlDG1sZ4Zd2E@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <YKQiTlDG1sZ4Zd2E@google.com>
From:   Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 May 2021 15:42:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAeT=FzsXFNiteMB3sjskM401Ty4Ry_w80YcYB4ZYcZn0dqv5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/43] KVM: x86: Properly reset MMU context at vCPU RESET/INIT
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

> > > +       if (kvm_cr0_mmu_role_changed(old_cr0, kvm_read_cr0(vcpu)) ||
> > > +           kvm_cr4_mmu_role_changed(old_cr4, kvm_read_cr4(vcpu)))
> > > +               kvm_mmu_reset_context(vcpu);
> > >  }
> >
> > I'm wondering if kvm_vcpu_reset() should call kvm_mmu_reset_context()
> > for a change in EFER.NX as well.
>
> Oooh.  So there _should_ be no need.   Paging has to be enabled for EFER.NX to
> be relevant, and INIT toggles CR0.PG 1=>0 if paging was enabled and so is
> guaranteed to trigger a context reset.  And we do want to skip the context reset,
> e.g. INIT-SIPI-SIPI when the vCPU has paging disabled should continue using the
> same MMU.
>
> But, kvm_calc_mmu_role_common() neglects to ignore NX if CR0.PG=0, and so the
> MMU role will be stale if INIT clears EFER.NX without forcing a context reset.
> However, that's benign from a functionality perspective because the context
> itself correctly incorporates CR0.PG, it's only the role that's borked.  I.e.
> KVM will fail to reuse a page/context due to the spurious role.nxe, but the
> permission checks are always be correct.
>
> I'll add a comment here and send a patch to fix the role calculation.

Thank you so much for the explanation !
I understand your intention and why it would be benign.

Then, I'm wondering if kvm_cr4_mmu_role_changed() needs to be
called here.  Looking at the Intel SDM, in my understanding,
all the bits kvm_cr4_mmu_role_changed() checks are relevant
only if paging is enabled.  (Or is my understanding incorrect ??)

Thanks,
Reiji