linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 06/13] KVM: x86: Add Intel Processor Trace virtualization mode

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 3 May 2018 15:48:12 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Luwei Kang <luwei.kang@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
        x86@...nel.org, rkrcmar@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        joro@...tes.org, peterz@...radead.org, chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/13] KVM: x86: Add Intel Processor Trace
 virtualization mode

On 03/05/2018 15:38, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:50:12PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 03/05/2018 14:48, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
>>>> Guest tracing can only be enabled at boot time, because the guest's
>>>> CPUID changes depending on whether it's enabled.  And likewise if perf
>>>> record can do system-wide tracing at any time during the guest's
>>>> execution, we need to know it at boot time in order to set the guest CPUID.
>>>
>>> CPUID is immaterial here; the real trick is to disallow the use of PT at
>>> runtime when the host suddenly decides to trace the guest, in such a way
>>> that the guest user is informed that their trace is incomplete due to the
>>> host activity.
>>
>> How do you do that?
> 
> Off the top of my head:
>   * you don't;
>   * you write something to the PT stream;
>   * you signal an error via RTIT_STATUS;
>   * guest always prevails: host gets PARTIAL records in case of a conflict.
> 
>> And you still need the module parameter to decide
>> whether the host is _allowed_ to cause incomplete traces in the guest.
> 
> Or rather a parameter to decide who wins in case both host and guest want
> to trace the guest. That's arguably better than having different versions of
> PT in the guest depending on a module parameter setting.

It's not different versions; it's having PT vs. not having PT at all.  I
don't really see it as a big issue.  The nice thing about this series is
that the interactions between PT code and KVM code are minimal.

Paolo