linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/17] KVM: x86/pmu: Add IA32_PEBS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 15 Jan 2021 23:29:22 +0800
From:   "Xu, Like" <like.xu@...el.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, eranian@...gle.com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, wei.w.wang@...el.com,
        luwei.kang@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/17] KVM: x86/pmu: Add IA32_PEBS_ENABLE MSR emulation
 for extended PEBS

On 2021/1/15 22:46, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 09:15:31PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>
>> +	if (cpuc->pebs_enabled & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_host_mask) {
>> +		arr[1].msr = MSR_IA32_PEBS_ENABLE;
>> +		arr[1].host = cpuc->pebs_enabled & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_guest_mask;
>> +		arr[1].guest = cpuc->pebs_enabled & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_host_mask;
>> +		/*
>> +		 * The guest PEBS will be disabled once the host PEBS is enabled
>> +		 * since the both enabled case may brings a unknown PMI to
>> +		 * confuse host and the guest PEBS overflow PMI would be missed.
>> +		 */
>> +		if (arr[1].host)
>> +			arr[1].guest = 0;
>> +		arr[0].guest |= arr[1].guest;
>> +		*nr = 2;
> Elsewhere you write:
>
>> When we have a PEBS PMI due to guest workload and vm-exits,
>> the code path from vm-exit to the host PEBS PMI handler may also
>> bring PEBS PMI and mark the status bit. The current PMI handler
>> can't distinguish them and would treat the later one as a suspicious
>> PMI and output a warning.
> So the reason isn't that spurious PMIs are tedious, but that the
> hardware is actually doing something weird.
>
> Or am I not reading things straight?

I think the PEBS facility works as expected because in the both enabled case,
the first PEBS PMI is generated from host counter 1 based on guest 
interrupt_threshold
and the later PEBS PMI could be generated from host counter 2 based on host 
interrupt_threshold.

Therefore, if we adjust the overflow value to a small value, so that the 
number of
instructions from vm-exit to global ctrl disabling could be enough big to 
trigger PEBS PMI.

Do you think this is weird, or do you see other possibilities ?