linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH Part2 RFC v4 06/40] x86/sev: Add helper functions for RMPUPDATE and PSMASH instruction

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]

Message-ID: <YPCE5D6h7V0iZiX/@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:56:36 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sergio Lopez <slp@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Dov Murik <dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@....com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, tony.luck@...el.com,
        Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com>,
        brijesh.ksingh@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Part2 RFC v4 06/40] x86/sev: Add helper functions for
 RMPUPDATE and PSMASH instruction

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 7/12/21 11:44 AM, Peter Gonda wrote:
> >> +int psmash(struct page *page)
> >> +{
> >> +       unsigned long spa = page_to_pfn(page) << PAGE_SHIFT;
> >> +       int ret;
> >> +
> >> +       if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP))
> >> +               return -ENXIO;
> >> +
> >> +       /* Retry if another processor is modifying the RMP entry. */
> >> +       do {
> >> +               /* Binutils version 2.36 supports the PSMASH mnemonic. */
> >> +               asm volatile(".byte 0xF3, 0x0F, 0x01, 0xFF"
> >> +                             : "=a"(ret)
> >> +                             : "a"(spa)
> >> +                             : "memory", "cc");
> >> +       } while (ret == FAIL_INUSE);
> > Should there be some retry limit here for safety? Or do we know that
> > we'll never be stuck in this loop? Ditto for the loop in rmpupdate.
> 
> It's probably fine to just leave this.  While you could *theoretically*
> lose this race forever, it's unlikely to happen in practice.  If it
> does, you'll get an easy-to-understand softlockup backtrace which should
> point here pretty quickly.

But should failure here even be tolerated?  The TDX cases spin on flows that are
_not_ due to (direct) contenion, e.g. a pending interrupt while flushing the
cache or lack of randomness when generating a key.  In this case, there are two
CPUs racing to modify the RMP entry, which implies that the final state of the
RMP entry is not deterministic.

> I think TDX has a few of these as well.  Most of the "SEAMCALL"s from
> host to the firmware doing the security enforcement have something like
> an -EBUSY as well.  I believe they just retry forever too.