Re: [PATCH v10 12/26] gunyah: vm_mgr: Add/remove user memory regions
From: Elliot Berman
Date: Thu Feb 23 2023 - 19:43:47 EST
On 2/21/2023 4:28 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
On 14/02/2023 21:24, Elliot Berman wrote:
When launching a virtual machine, Gunyah userspace allocates memory for
the guest and informs Gunyah about these memory regions through
SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION ioctl.
Co-developed-by: Prakruthi Deepak Heragu <quic_pheragu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Prakruthi Deepak Heragu <quic_pheragu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.c | 44 ++++++
drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.h | 25 ++++
drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr_mm.c | 235 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h | 33 +++++
5 files changed, 338 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr_mm.c
diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile b/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile
index 03951cf82023..ff8bc4925392 100644
--- a/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/Makefile
@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@
obj-$(CONFIG_GUNYAH) += gunyah.o
-gunyah_rsc_mgr-y += rsc_mgr.o rsc_mgr_rpc.o vm_mgr.o
+gunyah_rsc_mgr-y += rsc_mgr.o rsc_mgr_rpc.o vm_mgr.o vm_mgr_mm.o
obj-$(CONFIG_GUNYAH) += gunyah_rsc_mgr.o
diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.c b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.c
index fd890a57172e..84102bac03cc 100644
--- a/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.c
+++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.c
@@ -18,8 +18,16 @@
static void gh_vm_free(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct gh_vm *ghvm = container_of(work, struct gh_vm, free_work);
+ struct gh_vm_mem *mapping, *tmp;
int ret;
+ mutex_lock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(mapping, tmp, &ghvm->memory_mappings,
list) {
+ gh_vm_mem_reclaim(ghvm, mapping);
+ kfree(mapping);
+ }
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+
ret = gh_rm_dealloc_vmid(ghvm->rm, ghvm->vmid);
if (ret)
pr_warn("Failed to deallocate vmid: %d\n", ret);
@@ -48,11 +56,46 @@ static __must_check struct gh_vm
*gh_vm_alloc(struct gh_rm *rm)
ghvm->vmid = vmid;
ghvm->rm = rm;
+ mutex_init(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ghvm->memory_mappings);
INIT_WORK(&ghvm->free_work, gh_vm_free);
return ghvm;
}
+static long gh_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned
long arg)
+{
+ struct gh_vm *ghvm = filp->private_data;
+ void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
+ long r;
+
+ switch (cmd) {
+ case GH_VM_SET_USER_MEM_REGION: {
+ struct gh_userspace_memory_region region;
+
+ if (copy_from_user(®ion, argp, sizeof(region)))
+ return -EFAULT;
+
+ /* All other flag bits are reserved for future use */
+ if (region.flags & ~(GH_MEM_ALLOW_READ | GH_MEM_ALLOW_WRITE |
GH_MEM_ALLOW_EXEC |
+ GH_MEM_LENT))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+
+ if (region.memory_size)
+ r = gh_vm_mem_alloc(ghvm, ®ion);
+ else
+ r = gh_vm_mem_free(ghvm, region.label);
Looks like we are repurposing GH_VM_SET_USER_MEM_REGION for allocation
and freeing.
Should we have corresponding GH_VM_UN_SET_USER_MEM_REGION instead for
freeing? given that label is the only relevant member of struct
gh_userspace_memory_region in free case.
I'm following convention of KVM here, which re-uses
KVM_SET_USER_MEM_REGION for deleting regions as well.
One question though --
We don't have need to support removal of memory regions while VM is
running. Gunyah rejects removal of parcels that haven't been released
and no guests currently support releasing a memory parcel while it's
running. With the current series, the only time memory parcels can be
reclaimed is when VM is being disposed after shut down. With that in
mind, shall I drop the removal of memory regions in v11? I had added it
for symmetry/completeness, but I'm holding GH_VM_DESTROY for now as well
[1].
[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/52d944b1-3ea6-26b7-766a-2fed05dccf3a@xxxxxxxxxx/
+ break;
+ }
+ default:
+ r = -ENOTTY;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return r;
+}
+
static int gh_vm_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
{
struct gh_vm *ghvm = filp->private_data;
@@ -65,6 +108,7 @@ static int gh_vm_release(struct inode *inode,
struct file *filp)
}
static const struct file_operations gh_vm_fops = {
+ .unlocked_ioctl = gh_vm_ioctl,
.release = gh_vm_release,
.compat_ioctl = compat_ptr_ioctl,
.llseek = noop_llseek,
diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.h b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.h
index 76954da706e9..97bc00c34878 100644
--- a/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.h
+++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr.h
@@ -7,16 +7,41 @@
#define _GH_PRIV_VM_MGR_H
#include <linux/gunyah_rsc_mgr.h>
+#include <linux/list.h>
+#include <linux/miscdevice.h>
+#include <linux/mutex.h>
#include <uapi/linux/gunyah.h>
long gh_dev_vm_mgr_ioctl(struct gh_rm *rm, unsigned int cmd,
unsigned long arg);
+enum gh_vm_mem_share_type {
+ VM_MEM_SHARE,
+ VM_MEM_LEND,
+};
+
+struct gh_vm_mem {
+ struct list_head list;
+ enum gh_vm_mem_share_type share_type;
+ struct gh_rm_mem_parcel parcel;
+
+ __u64 guest_phys_addr;
+ struct page **pages;
+ unsigned long npages;
+};
+
struct gh_vm {
u16 vmid;
struct gh_rm *rm;
struct work_struct free_work;
+ struct mutex mm_lock;
+ struct list_head memory_mappings;
};
+int gh_vm_mem_alloc(struct gh_vm *ghvm, struct
gh_userspace_memory_region *region);
+void gh_vm_mem_reclaim(struct gh_vm *ghvm, struct gh_vm_mem *mapping);
+int gh_vm_mem_free(struct gh_vm *ghvm, u32 label);
+struct gh_vm_mem *gh_vm_mem_find(struct gh_vm *ghvm, u32 label);
+
#endif
diff --git a/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr_mm.c
b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr_mm.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..03e71a36ea3b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/virt/gunyah/vm_mgr_mm.c
@@ -0,0 +1,235 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) 2022-2023 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All
rights reserved.
+ */
+
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) "gh_vm_mgr: " fmt
+
+#include <linux/gunyah_rsc_mgr.h>
+#include <linux/mm.h>
+
+#include <uapi/linux/gunyah.h>
+
+#include "vm_mgr.h"
+
+static inline bool page_contiguous(phys_addr_t p, phys_addr_t t)
+{
+ return t - p == PAGE_SIZE;
+}
+
+static struct gh_vm_mem *__gh_vm_mem_find(struct gh_vm *ghvm, u32 label)
+ __must_hold(&ghvm->mm_lock)
+{
+ struct gh_vm_mem *mapping;
+
+ list_for_each_entry(mapping, &ghvm->memory_mappings, list)
+ if (mapping->parcel.label == label)
+ return mapping;
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+void gh_vm_mem_reclaim(struct gh_vm *ghvm, struct gh_vm_mem *mapping)
+ __must_hold(&ghvm->mm_lock)
+{
+ int i, ret = 0;
+
+ if (mapping->parcel.mem_handle != GH_MEM_HANDLE_INVAL) {
+ ret = gh_rm_mem_reclaim(ghvm->rm, &mapping->parcel);
+ if (ret)
+ pr_warn("Failed to reclaim memory parcel for label %d:
%d\n",
+ mapping->parcel.label, ret);
what the behavoir of hypervisor if we failed to reclaim the pages?
Hypervisor doesn't modify access to the pages.
+ }
+
+ if (!ret)
So we will leave the user pages pinned if hypervisor call fails, but
further down we free the mapping all together.
Am not 100% sure if this will have any side-effect, but is it okay to
leave user-pages pinned with no possiblity of unpinning them in such cases?
I think it's not okay, but the only way this could fail is if there is a
kernel bug. I'd rather not BUG_ON?
+ for (i = 0; i < mapping->npages; i++)
+ unpin_user_page(mapping->pages[i]);
+
+ kfree(mapping->pages);
+ kfree(mapping->parcel.acl_entries);
+ kfree(mapping->parcel.mem_entries);
+
+ list_del(&mapping->list);
+}
+
+struct gh_vm_mem *gh_vm_mem_find(struct gh_vm *ghvm, u32 label)
+{
+ struct gh_vm_mem *mapping;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ if (ret)
+ return ERR_PTR(ret);
new line would be nice here.
+ mapping = __gh_vm_mem_find(ghvm, label);
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
new line would be nice here.
+ return mapping ? : ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
+}
+
+int gh_vm_mem_alloc(struct gh_vm *ghvm, struct
gh_userspace_memory_region *region)
+{
+ struct gh_vm_mem *mapping, *tmp_mapping;
+ struct gh_rm_mem_entry *mem_entries;
+ phys_addr_t curr_page, prev_page;
+ struct gh_rm_mem_parcel *parcel;
+ int i, j, pinned, ret = 0;
+ size_t entry_size;
+ u16 vmid;
+
+ if (!gh_api_has_feature(GH_API_FEATURE_MEMEXTENT))
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
Should this not be first thing to do in ioctl before even entering this
function?
I don't see why one place is better than other, but I can move.
+
+ if (!region->memory_size || !PAGE_ALIGNED(region->memory_size) ||
+ !PAGE_ALIGNED(region->userspace_addr) ||
!PAGE_ALIGNED(region->guest_phys_addr))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
new line.
+ mapping = __gh_vm_mem_find(ghvm, region->label);
+ if (mapping) {
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ return -EEXIST;
+ }
+
+ mapping = kzalloc(sizeof(*mapping), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!mapping) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto free_mapping;
how about,
mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
return -ENMEM;
+ }
+
+ mapping->parcel.label = region->label;
+ mapping->guest_phys_addr = region->guest_phys_addr;
+ mapping->npages = region->memory_size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
+ parcel = &mapping->parcel;
+ parcel->mem_handle = GH_MEM_HANDLE_INVAL; /* to be filled later
by mem_share/mem_lend */
+ parcel->mem_type = GH_RM_MEM_TYPE_NORMAL;
+
+ /* Check for overlap */
+ list_for_each_entry(tmp_mapping, &ghvm->memory_mappings, list) {
+ if (!((mapping->guest_phys_addr + (mapping->npages <<
PAGE_SHIFT) <=
+ tmp_mapping->guest_phys_addr) ||
+ (mapping->guest_phys_addr >=
+ tmp_mapping->guest_phys_addr + (tmp_mapping->npages <<
PAGE_SHIFT)))) {
+ ret = -EEXIST;
+ goto free_mapping;
+ }
+ }
+
+ list_add(&mapping->list, &ghvm->memory_mappings);
+
+ mapping->pages = kcalloc(mapping->npages,
sizeof(*mapping->pages), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!mapping->pages) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ mapping->npages = 0; /* update npages for reclaim */
+ goto reclaim;
+ }
+
+ pinned = pin_user_pages_fast(region->userspace_addr,
mapping->npages,
+ FOLL_WRITE | FOLL_LONGTERM, mapping->pages);
+ if (pinned < 0) {
+ ret = pinned;
+ mapping->npages = 0; /* update npages for reclaim */
+ goto reclaim;
+ } else if (pinned != mapping->npages) {
+ ret = -EFAULT;
+ mapping->npages = pinned; /* update npages for reclaim */
+ goto reclaim;
+ }
+
+ if (region->flags & GH_MEM_LENT) {
+ parcel->n_acl_entries = 1;
+ mapping->share_type = VM_MEM_LEND;
+ } else {
+ parcel->n_acl_entries = 2;
+ mapping->share_type = VM_MEM_SHARE;
+ }
+ parcel->acl_entries = kcalloc(parcel->n_acl_entries,
sizeof(*parcel->acl_entries),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!parcel->acl_entries) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto reclaim;
+ }
+
+ parcel->acl_entries[0].vmid = cpu_to_le16(ghvm->vmid);
new line
+ if (region->flags & GH_MEM_ALLOW_READ)
+ parcel->acl_entries[0].perms |= GH_RM_ACL_R;
+ if (region->flags & GH_MEM_ALLOW_WRITE)
+ parcel->acl_entries[0].perms |= GH_RM_ACL_W;
+ if (region->flags & GH_MEM_ALLOW_EXEC)
+ parcel->acl_entries[0].perms |= GH_RM_ACL_X;
+
+ if (mapping->share_type == VM_MEM_SHARE) {
+ ret = gh_rm_get_vmid(ghvm->rm, &vmid);
+ if (ret)
+ goto reclaim;
+
+ parcel->acl_entries[1].vmid = cpu_to_le16(vmid);
+ /* Host assumed to have all these permissions. Gunyah will not
+ * grant new permissions if host actually had less than RWX
+ */
+ parcel->acl_entries[1].perms |= GH_RM_ACL_R | GH_RM_ACL_W |
GH_RM_ACL_X;
+ }
+
+ mem_entries = kcalloc(mapping->npages, sizeof(*mem_entries),
GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!mem_entries) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto reclaim;
+ }
+
+ /* reduce number of entries by combining contiguous pages into
single memory entry */
+ prev_page = page_to_phys(mapping->pages[0]);
+ mem_entries[0].ipa_base = cpu_to_le64(prev_page);
+ entry_size = PAGE_SIZE;
new line
+ for (i = 1, j = 0; i < mapping->npages; i++) {
+ curr_page = page_to_phys(mapping->pages[i]);
+ if (page_contiguous(prev_page, curr_page)) {
+ entry_size += PAGE_SIZE;
+ } else {
+ mem_entries[j].size = cpu_to_le64(entry_size);
+ j++;
+ mem_entries[j].ipa_base = cpu_to_le64(curr_page);
+ entry_size = PAGE_SIZE;
+ }
+
+ prev_page = curr_page;
+ }
+ mem_entries[j].size = cpu_to_le64(entry_size);
+
+ parcel->n_mem_entries = j + 1;
+ parcel->mem_entries = kmemdup(mem_entries, sizeof(*mem_entries) *
parcel->n_mem_entries,
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ kfree(mem_entries);
+ if (!parcel->mem_entries) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto reclaim;
+ }
+
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ return 0;
+reclaim:
+ gh_vm_mem_reclaim(ghvm, mapping);
+free_mapping:
+ kfree(mapping);
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+int gh_vm_mem_free(struct gh_vm *ghvm, u32 label)
+{
+ struct gh_vm_mem *mapping;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ mapping = __gh_vm_mem_find(ghvm, label);
+ if (!mapping)
+ goto out;
+
+ gh_vm_mem_reclaim(ghvm, mapping);
+ kfree(mapping);
+out:
+ mutex_unlock(&ghvm->mm_lock);
+ return ret;
+}
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h b/include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h
index 10ba32d2b0a6..d85d12119a48 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h
@@ -20,4 +20,37 @@
*/
#define GH_CREATE_VM _IO(GH_IOCTL_TYPE, 0x0) /* Returns a
Gunyah VM fd */
+/*
+ * ioctls for VM fds
+ */
+
+/**
+ * struct gh_userspace_memory_region - Userspace memory descripion
for GH_VM_SET_USER_MEM_REGION
+ * @label: Unique identifer to the region.
+ * @flags: Flags for memory parcel behavior
+ * @guest_phys_addr: Location of the memory region in guest's memory
space (page-aligned)#
Note about overlapping here would be useful.
I'd like to reduce duplicate documentation where possible. I was
generally following this procedure:
- include/uapi/linux/gunyah.h docstrings have basic information to
remind what the field is
- Documentation/virt/gunyah/ documentation explains how to properly
use the APIs
I think it's definitely good idea to have separate documentation beyond
what can be described in docstrings here.
Thanks,
Elliot