[PATCH v4 26/28] KVM: TDX: Guard VM state transitions with "all" the locks

Yan Zhao yan.y.zhao at intel.com
Mon Nov 3 12:36:57 AEDT 2025


On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 10:34:51AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025, Yan Zhao wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 01:09:49PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Acquire kvm->lock, kvm->slots_lock, and all vcpu->mutex locks when
> > > servicing ioctls that (a) transition the TD to a new state, i.e. when
> > > doing INIT or FINALIZE or (b) are only valid if the TD is in a specific
> > > state, i.e. when initializing a vCPU or memory region.  Acquiring "all"
> > > the locks fixes several KVM_BUG_ON() situations where a SEAMCALL can fail
> > > due to racing actions, e.g. if tdh_vp_create() contends with either
> > > tdh_mr_extend() or tdh_mr_finalize().
> > > 
> > > For all intents and purposes, the paths in question are fully serialized,
> > > i.e. there's no reason to try and allow anything remotely interesting to
> > > happen.  Smack 'em with a big hammer instead of trying to be "nice".
> > > 
> > > Acquire kvm->lock to prevent VM-wide things from happening, slots_lock to
> > > prevent kvm_mmu_zap_all_fast(), and _all_ vCPU mutexes to prevent vCPUs
> > s/kvm_mmu_zap_all_fast/kvm_mmu_zap_memslot
> 
> Argh!  Third time's a charm?  Hopefully...
> 
> > > @@ -3170,7 +3208,8 @@ static int tdx_vcpu_init_mem_region(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_tdx_cmd *c
> > >  
> > >  int tdx_vcpu_unlocked_ioctl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void __user *argp)
> > >  {
> > > -	struct kvm_tdx *kvm_tdx = to_kvm_tdx(vcpu->kvm);
> > > +	struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> > > +	struct kvm_tdx *kvm_tdx = to_kvm_tdx(kvm);
> > reverse xmas tree ?
> 
> No, because the shorter line generates an input to the longer line.  E.g. we could
> do this if we really, really want an xmas tree:
> 
> 	struct kvm_tdx *kvm_tdx = to_kvm_tdx(vcpu->kvm);
> 	struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> 
> but this won't compile
> 
> 	struct kvm_tdx *kvm_tdx = to_kvm_tdx(kvm);
> 	struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
Ah! Sorry. My attention was caught by the line length, completely missing the
dependency :(


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list