Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Message-ID: <9d336622-6964-454a-605f-1ca90b902836@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Jun 2022 14:54:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.16 07/28] x86/kvm/fpu: Limit guest
 user_xfeatures to supported bits of XCR0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
        chang.seok.bae@intel.com, luto@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
References: <20220301201344.18191-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20220301201344.18191-7-sashal@kernel.org>
 <5f2b7b93-d4c9-1d59-14df-6e8b2366ca8a@redhat.com>
 <YppVupW+IWsm7Osr@xz-m1.local>
 <2d9ba70b-ac18-a461-7a57-22df2c0165c6@redhat.com>
 <Yp5xSi6P3q187+A+@xz-m1.local>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <Yp5xSi6P3q187+A+@xz-m1.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 6/6/22 23:27, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 06:18:12PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> However there seems to be something missing at least to me, on why it'll
>>> fail a migration from 5.15 (without this patch) to 5.18 (with this patch).
>>> In my test case, user_xfeatures will be 0x7 (FP|SSE|YMM) if without this
>>> patch, but 0x0 if with it.
>>
>> What CPU model are you using for the VM?
> 
> I didn't specify it, assuming it's qemu64 with no extra parameters.

Ok, so indeed it lacks AVX and this patch can have an effect.

>> For example, if the source lacks this patch but the destination has it,
>> the source will transmit YMM registers, but the destination will fail to
>> set them if they are not available for the selected CPU model.
>>
>> See the commit message: "As a bonus, it will also fail if userspace tries to
>> set fpu features (with the KVM_SET_XSAVE ioctl) that are not compatible to
>> the guest configuration.  Such features will never be returned by
>> KVM_GET_XSAVE or KVM_GET_XSAVE2."
> 
> IIUC you meant we should have failed KVM_SET_XSAVE when they're not aligned
> (probably by failing validate_user_xstate_header when checking against the
> user_xfeatures on dest host). But that's probably not my case, because here
> KVM_SET_XSAVE succeeded, it's just that the guest gets a double fault after
> the precopy migration completes (or for postcopy when the switchover is
> done).

Difficult to say what's happening without seeing at least the guest code 
around the double fault (above you said "fail a migration" and I thought 
that was a different scenario than the double fault), and possibly which 
was the first exception that contributed to the double fault.

Paolo