From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 17:01:00 +0000 (+0100)
Subject: kvm: fix sorting of memslots with base_gfn == 0
X-Git-Url: https://git.stricted.de/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=efbeec7098eee2b3d2359d0cc24bbba0436e7f21;p=GitHub%2Fmoto-9609%2Fandroid_kernel_motorola_exynos9610.git

kvm: fix sorting of memslots with base_gfn == 0

Before commit 0e60b0799fed (kvm: change memslot sorting rule from size
to GFN, 2014-12-01), the memslots' sorting key was npages, meaning
that a valid memslot couldn't have its sorting key equal to zero.
On the other hand, a valid memslot can have base_gfn == 0, and invalid
memslots are identified by base_gfn == npages == 0.

Because of this, commit 0e60b0799fed broke the invariant that invalid
memslots are at the end of the mslots array.  When a memslot with
base_gfn == 0 was created, any invalid memslot before it were left
in place.

This can be fixed by changing the insertion to use a ">=" comparison
instead of "<=", but some care is needed to avoid breaking the case
of deleting a memslot; see the comment in update_memslots.

Thanks to Tiejun Chen for posting an initial patch for this bug.

Reported-by: Jamie Heilman <jamie@audible.transient.net>
Reported-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Tested-by: Jamie Heilman <jamie@audible.transient.net>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
---

diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index f5283438ee05..050974c051b5 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -687,11 +687,23 @@ static void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots,
 		slots->id_to_index[mslots[i].id] = i;
 		i++;
 	}
-	while (i > 0 &&
-	       new->base_gfn > mslots[i - 1].base_gfn) {
-		mslots[i] = mslots[i - 1];
-		slots->id_to_index[mslots[i].id] = i;
-		i--;
+
+	/*
+	 * The ">=" is needed when creating a slot with base_gfn == 0,
+	 * so that it moves before all those with base_gfn == npages == 0.
+	 *
+	 * On the other hand, if new->npages is zero, the above loop has
+	 * already left i pointing to the beginning of the empty part of
+	 * mslots, and the ">=" would move the hole backwards in this
+	 * case---which is wrong.  So skip the loop when deleting a slot.
+	 */
+	if (new->npages) {
+		while (i > 0 &&
+		       new->base_gfn >= mslots[i - 1].base_gfn) {
+			mslots[i] = mslots[i - 1];
+			slots->id_to_index[mslots[i].id] = i;
+			i--;
+		}
 	}
 
 	mslots[i] = *new;