Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] KVM: nVMX: Emulate EPTP switching for the L1 hypervisor

From: Radim KrÄmÃÅ
Date: Tue Aug 01 2017 - 11:17:40 EST


2017-07-28 15:52-0400, Bandan Das:
> When L2 uses vmfunc, L0 utilizes the associated vmexit to
> emulate a switching of the ept pointer by reloading the
> guest MMU.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Bandan Das <bsd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -7767,6 +7781,85 @@ static int handle_preemption_timer(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static bool check_ept_address_valid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 address)
> +{
> + struct vcpu_vmx *vmx = to_vmx(vcpu);
> + u64 mask = VMX_EPT_RWX_MASK;
> + int maxphyaddr = cpuid_maxphyaddr(vcpu);
> + struct kvm_mmu *mmu = vcpu->arch.walk_mmu;
> +
> + /* Check for execute_only validity */
> + if ((address & mask) == VMX_EPT_EXECUTABLE_MASK) {
> + if (!(vmx->nested.nested_vmx_ept_caps &
> + VMX_EPT_EXECUTE_ONLY_BIT))
> + return false;
> + }

This checks looks wrong ... bits 0:2 define the memory type:

0 = Uncacheable (UC)
6 = Write-back (WB)

If those are supported MSR IA32_VMX_EPT_VPID_CAP, so I think it should
return false when

(address & 0x7) == 0 && !(vmx->nested.nested_vmx_ept_caps & VMX_EPTP_UC_BIT))

the same for 6 and VMX_EPTP_WB_BIT and unconditionally for the remaining
types.

Btw. when is TLB flushed after EPTP switching?

> @@ -10354,10 +10456,20 @@ static int check_vmentry_prereqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
> vmx->nested.nested_vmx_entry_ctls_high))
> return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;
>
> - if (nested_cpu_has_vmfunc(vmcs12) &&
> - (vmcs12->vm_function_control &
> - ~vmx->nested.nested_vmx_vmfunc_controls))
> - return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;
> + if (nested_cpu_has_vmfunc(vmcs12)) {
> + if (vmcs12->vm_function_control &
> + ~vmx->nested.nested_vmx_vmfunc_controls)
> + return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;
> +
> + if (nested_cpu_has_eptp_switching(vmcs12)) {
> + if (!nested_cpu_has_ept(vmcs12) ||
> + (vmcs12->eptp_list_address >>
> + cpuid_maxphyaddr(vcpu)) ||
> + !IS_ALIGNED(vmcs12->eptp_list_address, 4096))

page_address_valid() would make this check a bit nicer,

thanks.

> + return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;