linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Check the corresponding bits according to the intel sdm

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAB5KdOZHdQeTiYWKebLZG0XgPsybHs1EMqM7=zQ+JoNK1QpkNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Mar 2021 08:39:50 +0800
From:   Haiwei Li <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        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>,
        Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Check the corresponding bits according to the
 intel sdm

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:49 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021, Haiwei Li wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 10:37 AM <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
> > >
> > > According to IA-32 SDM Vol.3D "A.1 BASIC VMX INFORMATION", two inspections
> > > are missing.
> > > * Bit 31 is always 0. Earlier versions of this manual specified that the
> > > VMCS revision identifier was a 32-bit field in bits 31:0 of this MSR. For
> > > all processors produced prior to this change, bit 31 of this MSR was read
> > > as 0.
> > > * The values of bits 47:45 and bits 63:57 are reserved and are read as 0.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > index 32cf828..0d6d13c 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > > @@ -2577,6 +2577,20 @@ static __init int setup_vmcs_config(struct vmcs_config *vmcs_conf,
> > >
> > >         rdmsr(MSR_IA32_VMX_BASIC, vmx_msr_low, vmx_msr_high);
> > >
> > > +       /*
> > > +        * IA-32 SDM Vol 3D: Bit 31 is always 0.
> > > +        * For all earlier processors, bit 31 of this MSR was read as 0.
> > > +        */
> > > +       if (vmx_msr_low & (1u<<31))
> > > +               return -EIO;
> >
> > Drop this code as Jim said.
> >
> > > +
> > > +       /*
> > > +        * IA-32 SDM Vol 3D: bits 47:45 and bits 63:57 are reserved and are read
> > > +        * as 0.
> > > +        */
> > > +       if (vmx_msr_high & 0xfe00e000)
> > > +               return -EIO;
> >
> > Is this ok? Can we pick up the part? :)
>
> No.  "Reserved and are read as 0" does not guarantee the bits will always be
> reserved.  There are very few bits used for feature enumeration in x86 that are
> guaranteed to be '0' for all eternity.
>
> The whole point of reserving bits in registers is so that the CPU vendor, Intel
> in this case, can introduce new features and enumerate them to software without
> colliding with existing features or breaking software.  E.g. if Intel adds a new
> feature and uses any of these bits to enumerate the feature, this check would
> prevent KVM from loading on CPUs that support the feature.

Got it, only explicit restrictions should be checked. Thanks.

--
Haiwei Li