[PATCH v3] KVM: arm64: Use BTI for nvhe

[Mostafa Saleh]

Hi Sudeep,

On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 03:33:39PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Mostafa,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:18:09PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> > Hi Sudeep,
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:41:36PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:08:45PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> > > > CONFIG_ARM64_BTI_KERNEL compiles the kernel to support ARMv8.5-BTI.
> > > > However, the nvhe code doesn't make use of it as it doesn't map any
> > > > pages with Guarded Page(GP) bit.
> > > > 
> > > > kvm pgtable code is modified to map executable pages with GP bit
> > > > if BTI is enabled for the kernel.
> > > > 
> > > > At hyp init, SCTLR_EL2.BT is set to 1 to match EL1 configuration
> > > > (SCTLR_EL1.BT1) set in bti_enable().
> > > > 
> > > > One difference between kernel and nvhe code, is that the kernel maps
> > > > .text with GP while nvhe maps all the executable pages, this makes
> > > > nvhe code need to deal with special initialization code coming from
> > > > other executable sections (.idmap.text).
> > > > For this we need to add bti instruction at the beginning of
> > > > __kvm_handle_stub_hvc as it can be called by  __host_hvc through
> > > > branch instruction(br) and unlike SYM_FUNC_START, SYM_CODE_START
> > > > doesn’t add bti instruction at the beginning, and it can’t be modified
> > > > to add it as it is used with vector tables.
> > > > Another solution which is more intrusive is to convert
> > > > __kvm_handle_stub_hvc to a function and inject “bti jc” instead of
> > > > “bti c” in SYM_FUNC_START
> > > >
> > > 
> > > I was chasing a bug in linux-next yesterday with protected nVHE(pKVM) and
> > > cpuidle enabled. The system fails to boot. I just bisected the issue to this
> > > patch and also saw this patch landed in the linus tree yesterday/today.
> > 
> > One of the challenges of BTI is that we need to add explicit BTI instructions
> > for assembly code. I checked the code to make sure that nothing was missing,
> > but maybe this is not the case.
> > Can you please share more about the issue (is ESR a Branch Target Exception,
> > call stack...) if possible.
> 
> I haven't debugged it any further, just reported it as soon as I bisected it.
> Reverting this get back the booting system. I am not sure if anything is going
> wrong when the CPU is entering suspend(highly unlikely in normal scenario but
> I am not so sure with pKVM trapping these PSCI calls now) or when it is woken
> up and resuming back. IIUC this now will happen via kvm_hyp_cpu_resume->
> __kvm_hyp_init_cpu->___kvm_hyp_init. 

Thanks a lot for the information.

I checked this now, and I believe I found an issue. I see that __kvm_hyp_init_cpu
calls kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry indirectly and there is no BTI there.
I think this is the only C function that needs special handling.

Can you please check if this solves the issue?

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/host.S b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/host.S
index c87c63133e10..7df63f364c3c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/host.S
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/host.S
@@ -297,3 +297,8 @@ SYM_CODE_START(__kvm_hyp_host_forward_smc)
 
        ret
 SYM_CODE_END(__kvm_hyp_host_forward_smc)
+
+SYM_CODE_START(kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry)
+       bti j
+       b __kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry
+SYM_CODE_END(kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/psci-relay.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/psci-relay.c
index 08508783ec3d..24543d2a3490 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/psci-relay.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/psci-relay.c
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ static int psci_system_suspend(u64 func_id, struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
                         __hyp_pa(init_params), 0);
 }
 
-asmlinkage void __noreturn kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry(bool is_cpu_on)
+asmlinkage void __noreturn __kvm_host_psci_cpu_entry(bool is_cpu_on)
 {
        struct psci_boot_args *boot_args;
        struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt;


> > Also, is this with CONFIG_ARM_PSCI_CPUIDLE?
> 
> Yes, basically the cpus can enter cpu_suspend which IIUC pKVM traps and
> handle for the host.

My current setup has no CONFIG_ARM_PSCI_CPUIDLE?, I will try to find
something I can test with.

> > 
> > > Not sure if this is something to do with the fact that pKVM skips to
> > > __kvm_handle_stub_hvc in __host_hvc.
> 
> Sorry, my bad. I meant pKVM skips calling __kvm_handle_stub_hvc in __host_hvc
> and jumps to __host_exit directly. Sorry for that, one wrong "to" changed the
> whole meaning.

I don't see an issue in this, as this path has no indirect branches.

> > __kvm_handle_stub_hvc is called from __host_hvc with "br x5"
> > That's why "bti j" was added at the beginning of __kvm_handle_stub_hvc,
> > so this should be fine.
> >
> 
> Yes I saw that and understood that but I wanted to tell the above which went
> horribly wrong before.
> 

Thanks,
Mostafa