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, 6 Jul 2021 17:33:19 -0400
From:   Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Kyung Min Park <kyung.min.park@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@...cle.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
        Victor Ding <victording@...gle.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Anthony Steinhauser <asteinhauser@...gle.com>,
        Anand K Mistry <amistry@...gle.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86/tsx: Add cmdline tsx=fake to not clear CPUID bits
 RTM and HLE

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 5:05 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 06/07/21 21:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 02:14:39PM -0700, Pawan Gupta wrote:
> >> On CPUs that deprecated TSX, clearing the enumeration bits CPUID.RTM and
> >> CPUID.HLE may not be desirable in some corner cases. Like a saved guest
> >> would refuse to resume if it was saved before the microcode update
> >> that deprecated TSX.
> > Why is a global option necessary to allow those guests to be
> > resumed?  Why can't KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID always return the HLE
> > and RTM bits as supported when the host CPU has them?
>
> It's a bit tricky, because HLE and RTM won't really behave well.  An old
> guest that sees RTM=1 might end up retrying and aborting transactions
> too much.  So I'm not sure that a QEMU "-cpu host" guest should have HLE
> and RTM enabled.

Is the purpose of GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID to return what is supported by
KVM, or to return what "-cpu host" should enable by default? They are
conflicting requirements in this case.

>
> So it makes sense to handle it in userspace, with one of the two
> following possibilities:
>
> - userspace sees TSX_FORCE_ABORT and if so it somehow "discourages"
> setting HLE/RTM, even though they are shown as supported
>
> - userspace sees TSX_FORCE_ABORT and if so it knows HLE/RTM can be set,
> even though they are discouraged in general

In either case, we can make new userspace behave well. I'm worried
about existing userspace:

Returning HLE=1,RTM=1 in GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID makes existing userspace
take bad decisions until it's updated.

Returning HLE=0,RTM=0 in GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID prevents existing
userspace from resuming existing VMs (despite being technically
possible).

The first option has an easy workaround that doesn't require a
software update (disabling HLE/RTM in the VM configuration). The
second option doesn't have a workaround. I'm inclined towards the
first option.


>
> In any case, KVM's "supported CPUID" is based on the host features but
> independent.  KVM can decide to show or hide the hardware HLE and RTM
> bits independent of the host tsx= setting; it may make sense to hide the
> bits via a module parameter, but in any case this patch is not needed.
>
> Paolo
>

-- 
Eduardo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ