| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:32:50 +0200 From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com> To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org> CC: <mingo@...e.hu>, <peterz@...radead.org>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/perf: Fix virtualization sanity check On 10/09/2012 05:51 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 05:38:34PM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote: >> In check_hw_exists() we try to detect non-emulated MSR accesses >> by writing an arbitrary value into one of the PMU registers >> and check if it's value after a readout is still the same. >> This algorithm silently assumes that the register does not contain >> the magic value already, which is wrong in at least one situation. >> >> Fix the algorithm to really do a read-modify-write cycle. This fixes >> a warning under Xen under some circumstances on AMD family 10h CPUs. >> >> The reasons in more details actually sound like a story from >> Believe It or Not!: >> First you need an AMD family 10h/12h CPU. These do not reset the >> PERF_CTR registers on a reboot. >> Now you boot bare metal Linux, which goes successfully through this >> check, but leaves the magic value of 0xabcd in the register. You >> don't use the performance counters, but do a reboot (warm reset). >> Then you choose to boot Xen. The check will be triggered with a >> recent Linux kernel as Dom0 again, trying to write 0xabcd into the >> MSR. Xen silently drops the write (expected), but the subsequent read >> will return the value in the register, which just happens to be the >> expected magic value. Thus the test misleadingly succeeds, leaving > > Is that an oversight in the hypervisor? as in should it disable > access to those MSRs? I thought it disabled to most of them already > unless you give some extra bootup parameters? (cpufreq=dom0 or something > like that). Probably, it seems like HVM guest get a proper handling of these MSRs, but Dom0 (and other PV guests) have no special handling. This may be an addition to the list of things Dom0 is inadvertently allowed to do (or at least to discover). Found other traces of MCE MSR accesses (and APIC warnings) just today. Maybe we should scan the kernel (or dmesg) for those things and handle them properly in one final(tm) patch. Btw.: Wei just today sent a patch for Xen to clear the PERF_CTR registers on boot, so we address this particular problem from both sides. Regards, Andre. > >> the kernel in the belief that the PMU is available. This will trigger >> the following message: >> >> [ 0.020294] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> [ 0.020311] WARNING: at arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c:730 xen_apic_write+0x15/0x17() >> [ 0.020318] Hardware name: empty >> [ 0.020323] Modules linked in: >> [ 0.020334] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.3.8 #7 >> [ 0.020340] Call Trace: >> [ 0.020354] [<ffffffff81050379>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0x98 >> [ 0.020369] [<ffffffff810503a6>] warn_slowpath_null+0x15/0x17 >> [ 0.020378] [<ffffffff810034df>] xen_apic_write+0x15/0x17 >> [ 0.020392] [<ffffffff8101cb2b>] perf_events_lapic_init+0x2e/0x30 >> [ 0.020410] [<ffffffff81ee4dd0>] init_hw_perf_events+0x250/0x407 >> [ 0.020419] [<ffffffff81ee4b80>] ? check_bugs+0x2d/0x2d >> [ 0.020430] [<ffffffff81002181>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x131 >> [ 0.020444] [<ffffffff81edbbf9>] kernel_init+0x91/0x15d >> [ 0.020456] [<ffffffff817caaa4>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 >> [ 0.020471] [<ffffffff817c347c>] ? retint_restore_args+0x5/0x6 >> [ 0.020481] [<ffffffff817caaa0>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13 >> [ 0.020500] ---[ end trace a7919e7f17c0a725 ]--- >> >> The new code will change every of the 16 low bits read from the >> register and tries to write and read-back that modified number >> from the MSR. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com> >> --- >> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c | 10 ++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c >> index 915b876..d18b2b8 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c >> @@ -208,12 +208,14 @@ static bool check_hw_exists(void) >> } >> >> /* >> - * Now write a value and read it back to see if it matches, >> - * this is needed to detect certain hardware emulators (qemu/kvm) >> - * that don't trap on the MSR access and always return 0s. >> + * Read the current value, change it and read it back to see if it >> + * matches, this is needed to detect certain hardware emulators >> + * (qemu/kvm) that don't trap on the MSR access and always return 0s. >> */ >> - val = 0xabcdUL; >> reg = x86_pmu_event_addr(0); >> + if (rdmsrl_safe(reg, &val)) >> + goto msr_fail; >> + val ^= 0xffffUL; >> ret = wrmsrl_safe(reg, val); >> ret |= rdmsrl_safe(reg, &val_new); >> if (ret || val != val_new) >> -- >> 1.7.12.1 >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists