From b5d1274409d0eec6d826f65d6dafebf9d77a1b99 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 18:00:40 +0100 Subject: 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 Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220322153204.2637400-1-scgl@linux.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens --- arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'arch') 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)) -- cgit v1.2.3