Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: H_SVM_INIT_START must call UV_RETURN
From: Bharata B Rao
Date: Fri Mar 20 2020 - 07:24:16 EST
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:26:43AM +0100, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> When the call to UV_REGISTER_MEM_SLOT is failing, for instance because
> there is not enough free secured memory, the Hypervisor (HV) has to call
> UV_RETURN to report the error to the Ultravisor (UV). Then the UV will call
> H_SVM_INIT_ABORT to abort the securing phase and go back to the calling VM.
>
> If the kvm->arch.secure_guest is not set, in the return path rfid is called
> but there is no valid context to get back to the SVM since the Hcall has
> been routed by the Ultravisor.
>
> Move the setting of kvm->arch.secure_guest earlier in
> kvmppc_h_svm_init_start() so in the return path, UV_RETURN will be called
> instead of rfid.
>
> Cc: Bharata B Rao <bharata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> index 79b1202b1c62..68dff151315c 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> @@ -209,6 +209,8 @@ unsigned long kvmppc_h_svm_init_start(struct kvm *kvm)
> int ret = H_SUCCESS;
> int srcu_idx;
>
> + kvm->arch.secure_guest = KVMPPC_SECURE_INIT_START;
> +
> if (!kvmppc_uvmem_bitmap)
> return H_UNSUPPORTED;
>
> @@ -233,7 +235,6 @@ unsigned long kvmppc_h_svm_init_start(struct kvm *kvm)
> goto out;
> }
> }
> - kvm->arch.secure_guest |= KVMPPC_SECURE_INIT_START;
There is an assumption that memory slots would have been registered with UV
if KVMPPC_SECURE_INIT_START has been done. KVM_PPC_SVM_OFF ioctl will skip
unregistration and other steps during reboot if KVMPPC_SECURE_INIT_START
hasn't been done.
Have you checked if that path isn't affected by this change?
Regards,
Bharata.