diff options
| author | Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com> | 2022-03-11 18:00:40 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> | 2022-05-02 19:45:03 +0200 |
| commit | b5d1274409d0eec6d826f65d6dafebf9d77a1b99 (patch) | |
| tree | 625cd38eba44cc56d11b7360690ad83feed99af6 /arch | |
| parent | 8b202ee218395319aec1ef44f72043e1fbaccdd6 (diff) | |
| download | linux-b5d1274409d0eec6d826f65d6dafebf9d77a1b99.tar.bz2 | |
KVM: s390: Fix lockdep issue in vm memop
Issuing a memop on a protected vm does not make sense,
neither is the memory readable/writable, nor does it make sense to check
storage keys. This is why the ioctl will return -EINVAL when it detects
the vm to be protected. However, in order to ensure that the vm cannot
become protected during the memop, the kvm->lock would need to be taken
for the duration of the ioctl. This is also required because
kvm_s390_pv_is_protected asserts that the lock must be held.
Instead, don't try to prevent this. If user space enables secure
execution concurrently with a memop it must accecpt the possibility of
the memop failing.
Still check if the vm is currently protected, but without locking and
consider it a heuristic.
Fixes: ef11c9463ae0 ("KVM: s390: Add vm IOCTL for key checked guest absolute memory access")
Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220322153204.2637400-1-scgl@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch')
| -rw-r--r-- | arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 11 |
1 files changed, 10 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index da3dabda1a12..76ad6408cb2c 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c @@ -2384,7 +2384,16 @@ static int kvm_s390_vm_mem_op(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_s390_mem_op *mop) return -EINVAL; if (mop->size > MEM_OP_MAX_SIZE) return -E2BIG; - if (kvm_s390_pv_is_protected(kvm)) + /* + * This is technically a heuristic only, if the kvm->lock is not + * taken, it is not guaranteed that the vm is/remains non-protected. + * This is ok from a kernel perspective, wrongdoing is detected + * on the access, -EFAULT is returned and the vm may crash the + * next time it accesses the memory in question. + * There is no sane usecase to do switching and a memop on two + * different CPUs at the same time. + */ + if (kvm_s390_pv_get_handle(kvm)) return -EINVAL; if (mop->flags & KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_SKEY_PROTECTION) { if (access_key_invalid(mop->key)) |