lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 2/9] KVM: Introduce per-page memory attributes
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 10:34:32AM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
> Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> writes:
>
> > In confidential computing usages, whether a page is private or shared is
> > necessary information for KVM to perform operations like page fault
> > handling, page zapping etc. There are other potential use cases for
> > per-page memory attributes, e.g. to make memory read-only (or no-exec,
> > or exec-only, etc.) without having to modify memslots.
> >
> > Introduce two ioctls (advertised by KVM_CAP_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES) to allow
> > userspace to operate on the per-page memory attributes.
> > - KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES to set the per-page memory attributes to
> > a guest memory range.
> > - KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES to return the KVM supported
> > memory attributes.
> >
> > KVM internally uses xarray to store the per-page memory attributes.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y2WB48kD0J4VGynX@google.com/
> > ---
> > Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig | 1 +
> > include/linux/kvm_host.h | 3 ++
> > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 17 ++++++++
> > virt/kvm/Kconfig | 3 ++
> > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 6 files changed, 163 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > index 5617bc4f899f..bb2f709c0900 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > @@ -5952,6 +5952,59 @@ delivery must be provided via the "reg_aen" struct.
> > The "pad" and "reserved" fields may be used for future extensions and should be
> > set to 0s by userspace.
> >
> > +4.138 KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > +-----------------------------------------
> > +
> > +:Capability: KVM_CAP_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > +:Architectures: x86
> > +:Type: vm ioctl
> > +:Parameters: u64 memory attributes bitmask(out)
> > +:Returns: 0 on success, <0 on error
> > +
> > +Returns supported memory attributes bitmask. Supported memory attributes will
> > +have the corresponding bits set in u64 memory attributes bitmask.
> > +
> > +The following memory attributes are defined::
> > +
> > + #define KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_READ (1ULL << 0)
> > + #define KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_WRITE (1ULL << 1)
> > + #define KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_EXECUTE (1ULL << 2)
> > + #define KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE (1ULL << 3)
> > +
> > +4.139 KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > +-----------------------------------------
> > +
> > +:Capability: KVM_CAP_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > +:Architectures: x86
> > +:Type: vm ioctl
> > +:Parameters: struct kvm_memory_attributes(in/out)
> > +:Returns: 0 on success, <0 on error
> > +
> > +Sets memory attributes for pages in a guest memory range. Parameters are
> > +specified via the following structure::
> > +
> > + struct kvm_memory_attributes {
> > + __u64 address;
> > + __u64 size;
> > + __u64 attributes;
> > + __u64 flags;
> > + };
> > +
> > +The user sets the per-page memory attributes to a guest memory range indicated
> > +by address/size, and in return KVM adjusts address and size to reflect the
> > +actual pages of the memory range have been successfully set to the attributes.
>
> This wording could cause some confusion, what about a simpler:
>
> "reflect the range of pages that had its attributes successfully set"

Thanks, this is much better.

>
> > +If the call returns 0, "address" is updated to the last successful address + 1
> > +and "size" is updated to the remaining address size that has not been set
> > +successfully.
>
> "address + 1 page" or "subsequent page" perhaps.
>
> In fact, wouldn't this all become simpler if size were number of pages instead?

It indeed becomes better if the size is number of pages and the address
is gfn, but I think we don't want to imply that the page size is 4K to
userspace.

>
> > The user should check the return value as well as the size to
> > +decide if the operation succeeded for the whole range or not. The user may want
> > +to retry the operation with the returned address/size if the previous range was
> > +partially successful.
> > +
> > +Both address and size should be page aligned and the supported attributes can be
> > +retrieved with KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES.
> > +
> > +The "flags" field may be used for future extensions and should be set to 0s.
> > +
>
> ...
>
> > +static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_mem_attributes(struct kvm *kvm,
> > + struct kvm_memory_attributes *attrs)
> > +{
> > + gfn_t start, end;
> > + unsigned long i;
> > + void *entry;
> > + u64 supported_attrs = kvm_supported_mem_attributes(kvm);
> > +
> > + /* flags is currently not used. */
> > + if (attrs->flags)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + if (attrs->attributes & ~supported_attrs)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + if (attrs->size == 0 || attrs->address + attrs->size < attrs->address)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(attrs->address) || !PAGE_ALIGNED(attrs->size))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + start = attrs->address >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + end = (attrs->address + attrs->size - 1 + PAGE_SIZE) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> Here PAGE_SIZE and -1 cancel out.

Correct!

>
> Consider using gpa_to_gfn as well.

Yes using gpa_to_gfn is appropriate.

Thanks,
Chao
>
> > +
> > + entry = attrs->attributes ? xa_mk_value(attrs->attributes) : NULL;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> > + for (i = start; i < end; i++)
> > + if (xa_err(xa_store(&kvm->mem_attr_array, i, entry,
> > + GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT)))
> > + break;
> > + mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> > +
> > + attrs->address = i << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + attrs->size = (end - i) << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES */
> > +
> > struct kvm_memory_slot *gfn_to_memslot(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)
> > {
> > return __gfn_to_memslot(kvm_memslots(kvm), gfn);
> > @@ -4459,6 +4508,9 @@ static long kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(struct kvm *kvm, long arg)
> > #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_MSI
> > case KVM_CAP_SIGNAL_MSI:
> > #endif
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > + case KVM_CAP_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES:
> > +#endif
> > #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQFD
> > case KVM_CAP_IRQFD:
> > case KVM_CAP_IRQFD_RESAMPLE:
> > @@ -4804,6 +4856,30 @@ static long kvm_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp,
> > break;
> > }
> > #endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQ_ROUTING */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
> > + case KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES: {
> > + u64 attrs = kvm_supported_mem_attributes(kvm);
> > +
> > + r = -EFAULT;
> > + if (copy_to_user(argp, &attrs, sizeof(attrs)))
> > + goto out;
> > + r = 0;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + case KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES: {
> > + struct kvm_memory_attributes attrs;
> > +
> > + r = -EFAULT;
> > + if (copy_from_user(&attrs, argp, sizeof(attrs)))
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + r = kvm_vm_ioctl_set_mem_attributes(kvm, &attrs);
> > +
> > + if (!r && copy_to_user(argp, &attrs, sizeof(attrs)))
> > + r = -EFAULT;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES */
> > case KVM_CREATE_DEVICE: {
> > struct kvm_create_device cd;

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-12-07 15:36    [W:0.362 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site