Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 17 Nov 2022 21:42:50 +0800
From:   Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
        "Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, aarcange@redhat.com,
        ddutile@redhat.com, dhildenb@redhat.com,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
        Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
        Wei W Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/8] KVM: Add KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT exit
Message-ID: <20221117134250.GC422408@chaop.bj.intel.com>
Reply-To: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
References: <20221025151344.3784230-1-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
 <20221025151344.3784230-4-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
 <2e252f4f-7d45-42ac-a88f-fa8045fe3748@app.fastmail.com>
 <Y3Uwi2lc4NDrdzML@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y3Uwi2lc4NDrdzML@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 06:48:43PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2022, at 8:13 AM, Chao Peng wrote:
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst 
> > > b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > index f3fa75649a78..975688912b8c 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > @@ -6537,6 +6537,29 @@ array field represents return values. The 
> > > userspace should update the return
> > >  values of SBI call before resuming the VCPU. For more details on 
> > > RISC-V SBI
> > >  spec refer, https://github.com/riscv/riscv-sbi-doc.
> > > 
> > > +::
> > > +
> > > +		/* KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT */
> > > +		struct {
> > > +  #define KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_PRIVATE	(1 << 0)
> > > +			__u32 flags;
> > > +			__u32 padding;
> > > +			__u64 gpa;
> > > +			__u64 size;
> > > +		} memory;
> > > +
> > 
> > Would it make sense to also have a field for the access type (read, write,
> > execute, etc)?  I realize that shared <-> private conversion doesn't strictly
> > need this, but it seems like it could be useful for logging failures and also
> > for avoiding a second immediate fault if the type gets converted but doesn't
> > have the right protection yet.
> 
> I don't think a separate field is necessary, that info can be conveyed via flags.
> Though maybe we should go straight to a u64 for flags.

Yeah, I can do that.

> Hmm, and maybe avoid bits
> 0-3 so that if/when RWX info is conveyed the flags can align with
> PROT_{READ,WRITE,EXEC} and the EPT flags, e.g.

You mean avoiding bits 0-2, right, bit3 is not so special and can be used
for KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_PRIVATE.

Chao
> 
> 	KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_READ	(1 << 0)
> 	KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_WRITE	(1 << 1)
> 	KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_EXECUTE	(1 << 2)
> 
> > (Obviously, if this were changed, KVM would need the ability to report that
> > it doesn't actually know the mode.)
> > 
> > --Andy