| 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: <20200314073414.184213-2-xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 15:34:05 +0800
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
hpa@...or.com, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, tony.luck@...el.com
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 01/10] x86/split_lock: Rework the initialization flow of split lock detection
Current initialization flow of split lock detection has following issues:
1. It assumes the initial value of MSR_TEST_CTRL.SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT to be
zero. However, it's possible that BIOS/firmware has set it.
2. X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT flag is unconditionally set even if
there is a virtualization flaw that FMS indicates the existence while
it's actually not supported.
Introducing a new sld_state, "sld_not_exist", which is set as the
default value. Only when sld_state != sld_not_exist, it goes to
initialization flow.
In initialization flow, it explicitly accesses MSR_TEST_CTRL and
SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT bit to ensure there is no virtualization flaw.
In detail,
1. sld_off, verify SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT bit can be cleared, and clear it;
2. sld_warn, verify SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT bit can be cleared and set,
and set it;
3. sld_fatal, verify SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT bit can be set, and set it;
Only when no MSR aceessing failure, can X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT be
set. Also, this can avoid using safe version RDMSR/WRMSR at runtime.
Signed-off-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
index db3e745e5d47..064ba12defc8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
@@ -34,17 +34,17 @@
#endif
enum split_lock_detect_state {
- sld_off = 0,
+ sld_not_exist = 0,
+ sld_off,
sld_warn,
sld_fatal,
};
/*
- * Default to sld_off because most systems do not support split lock detection
* split_lock_setup() will switch this to sld_warn on systems that support
* split lock detect, unless there is a command line override.
*/
-static enum split_lock_detect_state sld_state = sld_off;
+static enum split_lock_detect_state sld_state = sld_not_exist;
/*
* Processors which have self-snooping capability can handle conflicting
@@ -585,7 +585,7 @@ static void init_intel_misc_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
wrmsrl(MSR_MISC_FEATURES_ENABLES, msr);
}
-static void split_lock_init(void);
+static void split_lock_init(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c);
static void init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
{
@@ -702,7 +702,8 @@ static void init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
if (tsx_ctrl_state == TSX_CTRL_DISABLE)
tsx_disable();
- split_lock_init();
+ if (sld_state != sld_not_exist)
+ split_lock_init(c);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
@@ -989,7 +990,6 @@ static void __init split_lock_setup(void)
char arg[20];
int i, ret;
- setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT);
sld_state = sld_warn;
ret = cmdline_find_option(boot_command_line, "split_lock_detect",
@@ -1015,6 +1015,8 @@ static void __init split_lock_setup(void)
case sld_fatal:
pr_info("sending SIGBUS on user-space split_locks\n");
break;
+ default:
+ break;
}
}
@@ -1022,39 +1024,61 @@ static void __init split_lock_setup(void)
* Locking is not required at the moment because only bit 29 of this
* MSR is implemented and locking would not prevent that the operation
* of one thread is immediately undone by the sibling thread.
- * Use the "safe" versions of rdmsr/wrmsr here because although code
- * checks CPUID and MSR bits to make sure the TEST_CTRL MSR should
- * exist, there may be glitches in virtualization that leave a guest
- * with an incorrect view of real h/w capabilities.
*/
-static bool __sld_msr_set(bool on)
+static void __sld_msr_set(bool on)
{
u64 test_ctrl_val;
- if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, &test_ctrl_val))
- return false;
+ rdmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val);
if (on)
test_ctrl_val |= MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT;
else
test_ctrl_val &= ~MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT;
- return !wrmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val);
+ wrmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val);
}
-static void split_lock_init(void)
+/*
+ * Use the "safe" versions of rdmsr/wrmsr here because although code
+ * checks CPUID and MSR bits to make sure the TEST_CTRL MSR should
+ * exist, there may be glitches in virtualization that leave a guest
+ * with an incorrect view of real h/w capabilities.
+ * If not msr_broken, then it needn't use "safe" version at runtime.
+ */
+static void split_lock_init(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
{
- if (sld_state == sld_off)
- return;
+ u64 test_ctrl_val;
- if (__sld_msr_set(true))
- return;
+ if (rdmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, &test_ctrl_val))
+ goto msr_broken;
+
+ switch (sld_state) {
+ case sld_off:
+ if (wrmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val & ~MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
+ goto msr_broken;
+ break;
+ case sld_warn:
+ if (wrmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val & ~MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
+ goto msr_broken;
+ fallthrough;
+ case sld_fatal:
+ if (wrmsrl_safe(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val | MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
+ goto msr_broken;
+ break;
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+
+ set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT);
+ return;
+msr_broken:
/*
* If this is anything other than the boot-cpu, you've done
* funny things and you get to keep whatever pieces.
*/
- pr_warn("MSR fail -- disabled\n");
+ pr_warn_once("MSR fail -- disabled\n");
sld_state = sld_off;
}
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists