linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.16 005/279] x86: Add check for APIC access address for vmentry of L2 guests

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: <20180618080609.061522739@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:09:50 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@...cle.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@...cle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.16 005/279] x86: Add check for APIC access address for vmentry of L2 guests

4.16-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@...cle.com>

[ Upstream commit f0f4cf5b306620282db0c59ff963012e1973e025 ]

According to the sub-section titled 'VM-Execution Control Fields' in the
section titled 'Basic VM-Entry Checks' in Intel SDM vol. 3C, the following
vmentry check must be enforced:

    If the 'virtualize APIC-accesses' VM-execution control is 1, the
    APIC-access address must satisfy the following checks:

	- Bits 11:0 of the address must be 0.
	- The address should not set any bits beyond the processor's
	  physical-address width.

This patch adds the necessary check to conform to this rule. If the check
fails, we cause the L2 VMENTRY to fail which is what the associated unit
test (following patch) expects.

Reviewed-by: Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>
Signed-off-by: Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c |   13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -10338,6 +10338,16 @@ static inline bool nested_vmx_prepare_ms
 	return true;
 }
 
+static int nested_vmx_check_apic_access_controls(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
+					  struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
+{
+	if (nested_cpu_has2(vmcs12, SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_APIC_ACCESSES) &&
+	    !page_address_valid(vcpu, vmcs12->apic_access_addr))
+		return -EINVAL;
+	else
+		return 0;
+}
+
 static int nested_vmx_check_apicv_controls(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
 					   struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
 {
@@ -11006,6 +11016,9 @@ static int check_vmentry_prereqs(struct
 	if (nested_vmx_check_msr_bitmap_controls(vcpu, vmcs12))
 		return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;
 
+	if (nested_vmx_check_apic_access_controls(vcpu, vmcs12))
+		return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;
+
 	if (nested_vmx_check_tpr_shadow_controls(vcpu, vmcs12))
 		return VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD;