Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86 / vmx: use a 'normal' domheap page for APIC_DEFAULT_PHYS_BASE

["Durrant, Paul" <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xen-devel <xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
> Julien Grall
> Sent: 21 January 2020 12:29
> To: Durrant, Paul <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>; Stefano Stabellini
> <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>; Wei Liu
> <wl@xxxxxxx>; Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>; George
> Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Cooper
> <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86 / vmx: use a 'normal' domheap
> page for APIC_DEFAULT_PHYS_BASE
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 21/01/2020 12:00, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > diff --git a/xen/common/page_alloc.c b/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> > index 919a270587..ef327072ed 100644
> > --- a/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -2269,7 +2269,8 @@ int assign_pages(
> >
> >       if ( !(memflags & MEMF_no_refcount) )
> >       {
> > -        if ( unlikely((d->tot_pages + (1 << order)) > d->max_pages) )
> > +        if ( unlikely((d->tot_pages + (1 << order)) > d->max_pages) &&
> > +             d->creation_finished )
> 
> This is not entirely obvious to me how this is safe. What would happen
> if d->creation_finished is set on another CPU at the same time? At least
> on Arm, this may not be seen directly.
> 
> I guess the problem would not only happen in this use case (I am more
> concerned in the physmap code), but it would be good to document how it
> is meant to be safe to use.
> 
> However, AFAIU, the only reason for the check to be here is because
> d->max_pages is set quite late. How about setting max_pages as part of
> the domain_create hypercall?

That would be useful but certainly more invasive. There's no way a guest vcpu 
can see creation_finished set to true as it is still paused. The only concern 
would be a stub domain causing domheap pages to be allocated on behalf of the 
guest, and can we not trust a stub domain until it's guest has been unpaused 
(since there is no scope for the guest to attack it until then)?

  Paul

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Julien Grall
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel