linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data when SEV is active

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: <20180906122423.GA11144@zn.tnic>
Date:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 14:24:23 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data
 when SEV is active

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 06:43:02AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Currently, the per-cpu pvclock data is allocated dynamically when
> cpu > HVC_BOOT_ARRAY_SIZE. The physical address of this variable is
> shared between the guest and the hypervisor hence it must be mapped as
> unencrypted (ie. C=0) when SEV is active.
> 
> When SEV is active, we will be wasting fairly sizeable amount of memory
> since each CPU will be doing a separate 4k allocation so that it can clear
> C-bit. Let's define few extra static page sized array of pvclock data.
> In the preparatory stage of CPU hotplug, use the element of this static
> array to avoid the dynamic allocation. This array will be put in
> the .data..decrypted section so that its mapped with C=0 during the boot.
> 
> In non-SEV case, this static page will unused and free'd by the
> free_decrypted_mem().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h |  4 ++++
>  arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c         | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
>  arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S      |  3 +++
>  arch/x86/mm/init.c                 |  3 +++
>  arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c          | 10 ++++++++++
>  5 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
> index 802b2eb..aa204af 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
> @@ -48,11 +48,13 @@ int __init early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size);
>  
>  /* Architecture __weak replacement functions */
>  void __init mem_encrypt_init(void);
> +void __init free_decrypted_mem(void);
>  
>  bool sme_active(void);
>  bool sev_active(void);
>  
>  #define __decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".data..decrypted")))
> +#define __decrypted_hvclock __attribute__((__section__(".data..decrypted_hvclock")))

So are we going to be defining a decrypted section for every piece of
machinery now?

That's a bit too much in my book.

Why can't you simply free everything in .data..decrypted on !SVE guests?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--