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]
Date:   Thu, 8 Oct 2020 21:04:54 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To:     stsp <stsp2@...dex.ru>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: x86: KVM_SET_SREGS.CR4 bug fixes and cleanup

On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 09:18:18PM +0300, stsp wrote:
> 08.10.2020 20:59, Sean Christopherson пишет:
> >On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 07:00:13PM +0300, stsp wrote:
> >>07.10.2020 04:44, Sean Christopherson пишет:
> >>>Two bug fixes to handle KVM_SET_SREGS without a preceding KVM_SET_CPUID2.
> >>Hi Sean & KVM devs.
> >>
> >>I tested the patches, and wherever I
> >>set VMXE in CR4, I now get
> >>KVM: KVM_SET_SREGS: Invalid argument
> >>Before the patch I was able (with many
> >>problems, but still) to set VMXE sometimes.
> >>
> >>So its a NAK so far, waiting for an update. :)
> >IIRC, you said you were going to test on AMD?  Assuming that's correct,
> 
> Yes, that is true.
> 
> 
> >  -EINVAL
> >is the expected behavior.  KVM was essentially lying before; it never actually
> >set CR4.VMXE in hardware, it just didn't properply detect the error and so VMXE
> >was set in KVM's shadow of the guest's CR4.
> 
> Hmm. But at least it was lying
> similarly on AMD and Intel CPUs. :)
> So I was able to reproduce the problems
> myself.
> Do you mean, any AMD tests are now useless, and we need to proceed with Intel
> tests only?

For anything VMXE related, yes.

> Then additional question.
> On old Intel CPUs we needed to set VMXE in guest to make it to work in
> nested-guest mode.
> Is it still needed even with your patches?
> Or the nested-guest mode will work now even on older Intel CPUs and KVM will
> set VMXE for us itself, when needed?

I'm struggling to even come up with a theory as to how setting VMXE from
userspace would have impacted KVM with unrestricted_guest=n, let alone fixed
anything.

CR4.VMXE must always be 1 in _hardware_ when VMX is on, including when running
the guest.  But KVM forces vmcs.GUEST_CR4.VMXE=1 at all times, regardless of
the guest's actual value (the guest sees a shadow value when it reads CR4).

And unless I grossly misunderstand dosemu2, it's not doing anything related to
nested virtualization, i.e. the stuffing VMXE=1 for the guest's shadow value
should have absolutely zero impact.

More than likely, VMXE was a red herring.  Given that the reporter is also
seeing the same bug on bare metal after moving to kernel 5.4, odds are good
the issue is related to unrestricted_guest=n and has nothing to do with nVMX.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ