arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
From: "Yuhang.chen" <yhchen312@gmail.com>
The VMID update critical section performs an IPI broadcast via
on_each_cpu_mask() on VMID version rollover, which must not be preempted
under PREEMPT_RT. Convert vmid_lock to raw_spinlock_t and use plain
raw_spin_lock()/raw_spin_unlock() (interrupts stay enabled, since
on_each_cpu_mask() requires it).
Assisted-by: YuanSheng:deepseek-v4-pro
Co-developed-by: Quan Zhou <zhouquan@iscas.ac.cn>
Signed-off-by: Quan Zhou <zhouquan@iscas.ac.cn>
Signed-off-by: Yuhang.chen <yhchen312@gmail.com>
---
arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
index c15bdb1dd8be..21c2b276b55d 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
static unsigned long vmid_version = 1;
static unsigned long vmid_next;
static unsigned long vmid_bits __ro_after_init;
-static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(vmid_lock);
+static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(vmid_lock);
void __init kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_detect(void)
{
@@ -78,14 +78,14 @@ void kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (!kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_ver_changed(vmid))
return;
- spin_lock(&vmid_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&vmid_lock);
/*
* We need to re-check the vmid_version here to ensure that if
* another vcpu already allocated a valid vmid for this vm.
*/
if (!kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_ver_changed(vmid)) {
- spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
return;
}
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ void kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
WRITE_ONCE(vmid->vmid_version, READ_ONCE(vmid_version));
- spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
+ raw_spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
/* Request G-stage page table update for all VCPUs */
kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, v, vcpu->kvm)
--
2.34.1
On 2026-07-16 14:40:11 [+0800], yhchen312@gmail.com wrote: > From: "Yuhang.chen" <yhchen312@gmail.com> > > The VMID update critical section performs an IPI broadcast via > on_each_cpu_mask() on VMID version rollover, which must not be preempted > under PREEMPT_RT. Here you state _why_ it must not be preempted. What would be the worst that could happen. > Convert vmid_lock to raw_spinlock_t and use plain That part starting with "Convert" belongs into into a new line. > raw_spin_lock()/raw_spin_unlock() (interrupts stay enabled, since > on_each_cpu_mask() requires it). > > Assisted-by: YuanSheng:deepseek-v4-pro > Co-developed-by: Quan Zhou <zhouquan@iscas.ac.cn> > Signed-off-by: Quan Zhou <zhouquan@iscas.ac.cn> > Signed-off-by: Yuhang.chen <yhchen312@gmail.com> Sebastian
Hi Sebastian, thanks for having a look. On 2026-07-17 06:51:37 [+0000], Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Here you state _why_ it must not be preempted. What would be the worst > that could happen. The worst case is an unbounded hold of vmid_lock that stalls guest entry system-wide. On rollover the section bumps vmid_version and then broadcasts a guest-TLB flush via on_each_cpu_mask(..., wait=1) before assigning a fresh VMID. Under PREEMPT_RT a plain spinlock_t is preemptible, so the holder could be scheduled out while still waiting for that broadcast flush to finish and keep vmid_lock held for an unbounded scheduling delay; every other vCPU reaching the VMID-(re)assignment path on its way into the guest would then block on the lock. The rollover is otherwise a short critical section (a version bump plus one IPI), so keeping it non-preemptible with raw_spinlock_t bounds its hold time. I'll fold that into the commit log. > That part starting with "Convert" belongs into into a new line. Will fix in v2. I'll send v2 with both changes. Yuhang
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Race condition during VMID rollover allows a vCPU to transiently execute in guest mode with a stale VMID, compromising cross-VM isolation.
- [High] Integer overflow in the VMID generation counter (vmid_version) on 32-bit systems causes a cross-VM isolation break.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] RISC-V: KVM: Use raw_spinlock for VMID update critical section ---
commit 7d899ea43321661351b3cdd958ba47c38d85eeed
Author: Yuhang.chen <yhchen312@gmail.com>
RISC-V: KVM: Use raw_spinlock for VMID update critical section
This commit converts the vmid_lock to a raw_spinlock_t to prevent
preemption during the VMID update section under PREEMPT_RT. The update
path performs an IPI broadcast which requires preemption to be disabled.
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> index 3b426c800480c..33efde4bb9d75 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
> static unsigned long vmid_version = 1;
> static unsigned long vmid_next;
> static unsigned long vmid_bits __ro_after_init;
> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(vmid_lock);
> +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(vmid_lock);
>
> void __init kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_detect(void)
> {
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this unsigned long counter present an
overflow risk on 32-bit systems?
If a host user rapidly creates and destroys VMs, the 32-bit vmid_version could
wrap back to 0. Since a new VM's kvm_vmid struct is zero-initialized,
kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_ver_changed() would evaluate (0 != 0) as false:
kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_ver_changed() {
...
return unlikely(READ_ONCE(vmid->vmid_version) !=
READ_ONCE(vmid_version));
}
Could this cause multiple new VMs to share VMID 0, breaking cross-VM isolation
by allowing their memory accesses to hit each other's TLB entries?
[ ... ]
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ void kvm_riscv_gstage_vmid_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> WRITE_ONCE(vmid->vmid_version, READ_ONCE(vmid_version));
>
> - spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
> + raw_spin_unlock(&vmid_lock);
>
> /* Request G-stage page table update for all VCPUs */
> kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, v, vcpu->kvm)
> kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_UPDATE_HGATP, v);
[Severity: Critical]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does dropping the lock before
making the requests open a race window?
If the lock is released after updating vmid_version but before setting
KVM_REQ_UPDATE_HGATP, could a concurrent vCPU from the same VM observe the
new vmid_version without the lock?
If it sees no pending requests, it might proceed to enter the guest with a
stale VMID. If a global VMID rollover just occurred, could this stale VMID
have been re-assigned to a different VM, causing an isolation break?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260716064011.2387501-1-yhchen312@gmail.com?part=1
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.