linux-kernel - Re: Revert "x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3378738.8dlq1zuRqp@blindfold>
Date:   Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:45:29 +0100
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@...ma-star.at>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
        bp@...en8.de, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jpoimboe@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        jmattson@...gle.com, karahmed@...zon.de, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, sironi@...zon.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Revert "x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction_barrier()" crashes KVM guest

Am Freitag, 16. Februar 2018, 00:28:30 CET schrieb David Woodhouse:
> On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 00:12 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > [    2.791518] Code: 8b 45 00 49 8b 7d 08 49 83 c5 18 31 d2 31 f6 ff
> > d0 49 8b 45 00 48 85 c0 75 e9 eb b1 b9 49 00 00 00 b8 01 00 00 00 ba
> > 00 00 00 00 <0f> 30 e9 68 fd ff ff 9c 58 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 c5 fa
> > 66 0f 1f
> 
>   23:   b9 49 00 00 00          mov    $0x49,%ecx
>   28:   b8 01 00 00 00          mov    $0x1,%eax
>   2d:   ba 00 00 00 00          mov    $0x0,%edx
>   32:   0f 30                   wrmsr  
> 
> The faulting instruction is the wrmsr itself. That shouldn't happen; if
> the CPUID bit indicates that the MSR exists, then it should exist.
> 
> The reverted patch did use the C __wrmsr() macro which contained a
> fixup for this GP# but it was just a side-effect of the "cleanup" — it
> wasn't intentional because that really shouldn't happen. That looks
> like a qemu bug as first glance.

Hmmm, yes seems so. Just gave latest qemu a try, works fine. ;-\

Thanks,
//richard

-- 
sigma star gmbh - Eduard-Bodem-Gasse 6 - 6020 Innsbruck - Austria
ATU66964118 - FN 374287y