[PATCH 02/34] KVM: Assert that mmu_invalidate_in_progress *never* goes negative

Huang, Kai kai.huang at intel.com
Mon Nov 6 20:29:19 AEDT 2023

On Sun, 2023-11-05 at 17:30 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc at google.com>
> Move the assertion on the in-progress invalidation count from the primary
> MMU's notifier path to KVM's common notification path, i.e. assert that
> the count doesn't go negative even when the invalidation is coming from
> KVM itself.
> Opportunistically convert the assertion to a KVM_BUG_ON(), i.e. kill only
> the affected VM, not the entire kernel.  A corrupted count is fatal to the
> VM, e.g. the non-zero (negative) count will cause mmu_invalidate_retry()
> to block any and all attempts to install new mappings.  But it's far from
> guaranteed that an end() without a start() is fatal or even problematic to
> anything other than the target VM, e.g. the underlying bug could simply be
> a duplicate call to end().  And it's much more likely that a missed
> invalidation, i.e. a potential use-after-free, would manifest as no
> notification whatsoever, not an end() without a start().
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc at google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini at redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba at google.com>
> Tested-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba at google.com>
> Message-Id: <20231027182217.3615211-3-seanjc at google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini at redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Kai Huang <kai.huang at intel.com>

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list