linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 08/32] x86/traps: Add #VE support for TDX guest

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:   Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:12:48 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 08/32] x86/traps: Add #VE support for TDX guest


On 6/8/2021 10:53 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 6/8/21 10:48 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> On 4/26/21 11:01 AM, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_GUEST
>>>> +DEFINE_IDTENTRY(exc_virtualization_exception)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct ve_info ve;
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(), "entry code didn't wake RCU");
>>>> +
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * Consume #VE info before re-enabling interrupts. It will be
>>>> +	 * re-enabled after executing the TDGETVEINFO TDCALL.
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	ret = tdg_get_ve_info(&ve);
>>> Is it safe to have *anything* before the tdg_get_ve_info()?  For
>>> instance, say that RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN() triggers.  Will anything in there
>>> do MMIO?
>> I doubt it's safe, anything that's doing printing has the potential to trigger
>> #VE.  Even if we can prove it's safe for all possible paths, I can't think of a
>> reason to allow anything that's not absolutely necessary before retrieving the
>> #VE info.
> What about tracing?  Can I plop a kprobe in here or turn on ftrace?

I believe neither does mmio/msr normally (except maybe ftrace+tp_printk, 
but that will likely work because it shouldn't recurse more than once 
due to ftrace's reentry protection)

-Andi