Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: thp: kvm: fix memory corruption in KVM with THP enabled

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 04:59:57PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 04:50:30PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > I know nothing about kvm. How do you protect against pmd splitting between
> > get_user_pages() and the check?
> 
> get_user_pages_fast() runs fully lockless and unpins the page right
> away (we need a get_user_pages_fast without the FOLL_GET in fact to
> avoid a totally useless atomic_inc/dec!).
> 
> Then we take a lock that is also taken by
> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start. This way __split_huge_pmd will
> block in mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start if it tries to run again
> (every other mmu notifier like mmu_notifier_invalidate_page will also
> block).
> 
> Then after we serialized against __split_huge_pmd through the MMU
> notifier KVM internal locking, we are able to tell if any mmu_notifier
> invalidate happened in the region just before get_user_pages_fast()
> was invoked, until we call PageCompoundTransMap and we actually map
> the shadow pagetable into the compound page with hugepage
> granularity (to allow real 2MB TLBs if guest also uses trans_huge_pmd
> in the guest pagetables).
> 
> After the shadow pagetable is mapped, we drop the internal MMU
> notifier lock and __split_huge_pmd mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start
> can continue and drop the shadow pagetable that we just mapped in the
> above paragraph just before dropping the mmu notifier internal lock.
> 
> To be able to tell if any invalidate happened while
> get_user_pages_fast was running and until we grab the lock again and
> we start mapping the shadow pagtable we use:
> 
> 	mmu_seq = vcpu->kvm->mmu_notifier_seq;
> 	smp_rmb();
> 
> 	if (try_async_pf(vcpu, prefault, gfn, v, &pfn, write, &map_writable))
> 	    ^^^^^^^^^^^^ this is get_user_pages and does put_page on the page
> 	    		 and just returns the &pfn
> 	    		 this is why we need a get_user_pages_fast that won't
> 			 attempt to touch the page->_count at all! we can avoid
> 			 2 atomic ops for each secondary MMU fault that way
> 		return 0;
> 
> 	spin_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
> 	if (mmu_notifier_retry(vcpu->kvm, mmu_seq))
> 		goto out_unlock;
> 	... here we check PageTransCompoundMap(pfn_to_page(pfn)) and
> 	map a 4k or 2MB shadow pagetable on "pfn" ...
> 
> 
> Note mmu_notifier_retry does the other side of the smp_rmb():
> 
> 	smp_rmb();
> 	if (kvm->mmu_notifier_seq != mmu_seq)
> 		return 1;
> 	return 0;

Okay, I see.

But do we really want to make PageTransCompoundMap() visiable beyond KVM
code? It looks like too KVM-specific.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov