linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] KVM: x86: Add IBPB support

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]

Message-ID: <CALMp9eRKz+sKeah0V0bpiYJJUgTM5oisbtahkNGtW=seW2W5JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 Jan 2018 08:50:40 -0800
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To:     KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@...zon.de>
Cc:     "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Arjan Van De Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] KVM: x86: Add IBPB support

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:10 AM, KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@...zon.de> wrote:

> +               vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr(vmx->vmcs01.msr_bitmap, MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD,
> +                                             MSR_TYPE_W);

Why not disable this intercept eagerly, rather than lazily? Unlike
MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, there is no guest value to save/restore, so there
is no cost to disabling the intercept if the guest cpuid info declares
support for it.


> +       if (to_vmx(vcpu)->save_spec_ctrl_on_exit) {
> +               nested_vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr(
> +                               msr_bitmap_l1, msr_bitmap_l0,
> +                               MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD,
> +                               MSR_TYPE_R);
> +       }

I don't think this should be predicated on
"to_vmx(vcpu)->save_spec_ctrl_on_exit." Why not just
"guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_IBPB)"? Also, the final argument to
nested_vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr should be MSR_TYPE_W rather than
MSR_TYPE_R.