| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <026d5ca5-7b77-de6c-477e-ff39f0291ac0@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:15:38 -0500
From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc: brijesh.singh@....com, 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 v6 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data
when SEV is active
On 9/10/18 7:27 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 12:57:30PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>> Currently, the per-cpu pvclock data is allocated dynamically when
>> cpu > HVC_BOOT_ARRAY_SIZE.
> Well no, you need to write this correctly - what is "cpu >
> HVC_BOOT_ARRAY_SIZE" ?!
>
> ( I know what it is but I know it only because I've looked at that code before. )
>
> So no, please explain it in English not in code.
>> 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.
> This sentence is a good example about how to explain stuff in commit
> messages.
>
>> The C-bit works on a page,
> "The C-bit determines the encryption status of a 4K page."
>
>> hence we will be required to perform a
> Use passive tone in your commit message: no "we", etc...
>
>> full 4k page allocation to store a single 32-byte pvclock variable. It
>> will waste fairly sizeable amount of memory since each CPU will be doing
> "... will waste *a* fairly sizeable amount of ..."
>
>> a separate 4k allocation.
> Start new paragraph here and use passive tone.
>
>> Let's define a second array for the SEV case to
>> statically allocate for NR_CPUS and put this array in .data..decrypted
> NR_CPUS needs explaining for the unenlightened reader. Also,
>
> "... put this array in *the* .data..decrypted section... "
>
>> section so that its mapped with C=0 during boot.
> <---- newline here.
>
>> The .data..decrypted
>> section has a big chunk of memory that is currently unused. And since
>> second array will be used only when memory encryption is active hence
> "... since *the* second array... "
>
> s/hence //
>
>> free it when encryption is not active.
>>
>> 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 | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S | 3 +++
>> arch/x86/mm/init.c | 3 +++
>> arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> 5 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
>> index 802b2eb..cc46584 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);
> Proper prefixing:
>
> "mem_encrypt_free_decrypted"
>
> or so
>
>> bool sme_active(void);
>> bool sev_active(void);
>>
>> #define __decrypted __attribute__((__section__(".data..decrypted")))
>> +#define __decrypted_aux __attribute__((__section__(".data..decrypted.aux")))
>>
>> #else /* !CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT */
>>
>> @@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ static inline int __init
>> early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0; }
>>
>> #define __decrypted
>> +#define __decrypted_aux
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT */
>>
>> @@ -93,6 +96,7 @@ early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0;
>> #define __sme_pa_nodebug(x) (__pa_nodebug(x) | sme_me_mask)
>>
>> extern char __start_data_decrypted[], __end_data_decrypted[];
>> +extern char __start_data_decrypted_aux[];
>>
>> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c
>> index 376fd3a..6086b56 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c
>> @@ -65,6 +65,15 @@ static struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info
>> static struct pvclock_wall_clock wall_clock __decrypted;
>> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info *, hv_clock_per_cpu);
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
>> +/*
>> + * The auxiliary array will be used when SEV is active. In non-SEV case,
>> + * it will be freed by free_decrypted_mem().
>> + */
>> +static struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info
>> + hv_clock_aux[NR_CPUS] __decrypted_aux;
> Hmm, so worst case that's 64 4K pages:
>
> (8192*32)/4096 = 64 4K pages.
We can minimize the worst case memory usage. The number of VCPUs
supported by KVM maybe less than NR_CPUS. e.g Currently KVM_MAX_VCPUS is
set to 288
(288 * 64)/4096 = 4 4K pages.
(pvclock_vsyscall_time_info is cache aligned so it will be 64 bytes)
#if NR_CPUS > KVM_MAX_VCPUS
#define HV_AUX_ARRAY_SIZE KVM_MAX_VCPUS
#else
#define HV_AUX_ARRAY_SIZE NR_CPUS
#endif
static struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info
hv_clock_aux[HV_AUX_ARRAY_SIZE] __decrypted_aux;
> Now, the real question from all this SNAFU is, why can't all those point
> to a single struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info and all CPUs read a single
> thing? Why do they have to be per-CPU and thus waste so much memory?
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists