Re: [PATCH 5/8] KVM: SVM: Re-inject INT3/INTO instead of retrying the instruction

[Maciej S. Szmigiero]

On 6.04.2022 21:48, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2022, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> > On 6.04.2022 19:10, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2022, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> > And what if it's L0 that is trying to inject a NMI into L2?
> > In this case is_guest_mode() is true, but the full NMI injection machinery
> > should be used.
>
> Gah, you're right, I got misled by a benign bug in nested_vmx_l1_wants_exit() and
> was thinking that NMIs always exit.  The "L1 wants" part should be conditioned on
> NMI exiting being enabled.  It's benign because KVM always wants "real" NMIs, and
> so the path is never encountered.
>
> @@ -5980,7 +6005,7 @@ static bool nested_vmx_l1_wants_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>          switch ((u16)exit_reason.basic) {
>          case EXIT_REASON_EXCEPTION_NMI:
>                  intr_info = vmx_get_intr_info(vcpu);
> -               if (is_nmi(intr_info))
> +               if (is_nmi(intr_info) && nested_cpu_has_nmi_exiting(vmcs12))
>                          return true;
>                  else if (is_page_fault(intr_info))
>                          return true;

I guess you mean "benign" when having KVM as L1, since other hypervisors may
let their L2s handle NMIs themselves.

> > It is also incorrect to block L1 -> L2 NMI injection because either L1
> > or L2 is currently under NMI blocking: the first case is obvious,
> > the second because it's L1 that is supposed to take care of proper NMI
> > blocking for L2 when injecting an NMI there.
>
> Yep, but I don't think there's a bug here.  At least not for nVMX.

I agree this scenario should currently work (including on nSVM) - mentioned
it just as a constraint on solution space.

> > > > With the code in my previous patch set I planned to use
> > > > exit_during_event_injection() to detect such case, but if we implement
> > > > VMCB12 EVENTINJ parsing we can simply add a flag that the relevant event
> > > > comes from L1, so its normal injection side-effects should be skipped.
> > >
> > > Do we still need a flag based on the above?  Honest question... I've been staring
> > > at all this for the better part of an hour and may have lost track of things.
> >
> > If checking just is_guest_mode() is not enough due to reasons I described
> > above then we need to somehow determine in the NMI / IRQ injection handler
> > whether the event to be injected into L2 comes from L0 or L1.
> > For this (assuming we do VMCB12 EVENTINJ parsing) I think we need an extra flag.
>
> Yes :-(  And I believe the extra flag would need to be handled by KVM_{G,S}ET_VCPU_EVENTS.

Another option for saving and restoring a VM would be to add it to
KVM_{GET,SET}_NESTED_STATE somewhere (maybe as a part of the saved VMCB12
control area?).

Thanks,
Maciej