Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] tools/libxl: add vmtrace_pt_size parameter

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On 03/07/2020 11:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 11:56:38AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 03.07.2020 11:44, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 06:23:28PM +0200, Michał Leszczyński wrote:
> > > > ----- 2 lip 2020 o 11:00, Roger Pau Monné roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 02:33:46PM +0200, Michał Leszczyński wrote:
> > > > > > diff --git a/xen/include/public/domctl.h b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> > > > > > index 59bdc28c89..7b8289d436 100644
> > > > > > --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> > > > > > +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> > > > > > @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ struct xen_domctl_createdomain {
> > > > > >       uint32_t max_evtchn_port;
> > > > > >       int32_t max_grant_frames;
> > > > > >       int32_t max_maptrack_frames;
> > > > > > +    uint8_t vmtrace_pt_order;
> > > > > I've been thinking about this, and even though this is a domctl (so
> > > > > not a stable interface) we might want to consider using a size (or a
> > > > > number of pages) here rather than an order. IPT also supports
> > > > > TOPA mode (kind of a linked list of buffers) that would allow for
> > > > > sizes not rounded to order boundaries to be used, since then only each
> > > > > item in the linked list needs to be rounded to an order boundary, so
> > > > > you could for example use three 4K pages in TOPA mode AFAICT.
> > > > >
> > > > > Roger.
> > > > In previous versions it was "size" but it was requested to change it
> > > > to "order" in order to shrink the variable size from uint64_t to
> > > > uint8_t, because there is limited space for xen_domctl_createdomain
> > > > structure.
> > > It's likely I'm missing something here, but I wasn't aware
> > > xen_domctl_createdomain had any constrains regarding it's size. It's
> > > currently 48bytes which seems fairly small.
> > Additionally I would guess a uint32_t could do here, if the value
> > passed was "number of pages" rather than "number of bytes"?
Looking at the rest of the code, the toolstack accepts a 64-bit value. 
So this would lead to truncation of the buffer if it is bigger than 2^44 
bytes.
I agree such buffer is unlikely, yet I still think we want to harden the 
code whenever we can. So the solution is to either prevent check 
truncation in libxl or directly use 64-bit in the domctl.
My preference is the latter.

> That could work, not sure if it needs to state however that those will
> be 4K pages, since Arm can have a different minimum page size IIRC?
> (or that's already the assumption for all number of frames fields)
> vmtrace_nr_frames seems fine to me.
The hypercalls interface is using the same page granularity as the 
hypervisor (i.e 4KB).
While we already support guest using 64KB page granularity, it is 
impossible to have a 64KB Arm hypervisor in the current state. You are 
going to either break existing guest (if you switch to 64KB page 
granularity for the hypercall ABI) or render them insecure (the mimimum 
mapping in the P2M would be 64KB).
DOMCTLs are not stable yet, so using a number of pages is OK. However, I 
would strongly suggest to use a number of bytes for any xl/libxl/stable 
libraries interfaces as this avoids confusion and also make more 
futureproof.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall