linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 05/13] kvm: Add #PF injection for KVM XO

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: <08e46327-7d98-5c63-58ba-e9a171790c25@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Oct 2019 09:42:44 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org
Cc:     kristen@...ux.intel.com, deneen.t.dock@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/13] kvm: Add #PF injection for KVM XO

On 03/10/19 23:23, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> +	if (!vcpu->arch.gva_available)
> +		return 0;

Please return RET_PF_* constants, RET_PF_EMULATE here.

> +	if (error_code & PFERR_WRITE_MASK)
> +		fault_error_code |= X86_PF_WRITE;
> +
> +	fault.vector = PF_VECTOR;
> +	fault.error_code_valid = true;
> +	fault.error_code = fault_error_code;
> +	fault.nested_page_fault = false;
> +	fault.address = vcpu->arch.gva_val;
> +	fault.async_page_fault = true;

Not an async page fault.

> +	kvm_inject_page_fault(vcpu, &fault);
> +
> +	return 1;

Here you would return RET_PF_RETRY - you've injected the page fault and
all that's left to do is reenter execution of the vCPU.

[...]

> +	if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.xo_fault)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If not enough information to inject the fault,
> +		 * emulate to figure it out and emulate the PF.
> +		 */
> +		if (!try_inject_exec_only_pf(vcpu, error_code))
> +			return RET_PF_EMULATE;
> +
> +		return 1;
> +	}

Returning 1 is wrong, it's also RET_PF_EMULATE.  If you change
try_inject_exec_only_pf return values to RET_PF_*, you can simply return
the value of try_inject_exec_only_pf(vcpu, error_code).

That said, I wonder if it's better to just handle this in
handle_ept_violation.  Basically, if bits 5:3 of the exit qualification
are 100 you can bypass the whole mmu.c page fault handling and just
inject an exec-only page fault.

Thanks,

Paolo