linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/16] KVM: arm64: Wire MMIO guard hypercalls

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]

Message-ID: <20210727181145.GF19173@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jul 2021 19:11:46 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        qperret@...gle.com, dbrazdil@...gle.com,
        Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...eaurora.org>,
        Shanker R Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/16] KVM: arm64: Wire MMIO guard hypercalls

On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 05:31:50PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Plumb in the hypercall interface to allow a guest to discover,
> enroll, map and unmap MMIO regions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/arm-smccc.h   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c
> index 30da78f72b3b..a3deeb907fdd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>  #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/kvm_emulate.h>
> +#include <asm/kvm_mmu.h>
>  
>  #include <kvm/arm_hypercalls.h>
>  #include <kvm/arm_psci.h>
> @@ -129,10 +130,29 @@ int kvm_hvc_call_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_FEATURES_FUNC_ID:
>  		val[0] = BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_FEATURES);
>  		val[0] |= BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_PTP);
> +		val[0] |= BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_MMIO_GUARD_INFO);
> +		val[0] |= BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_MMIO_GUARD_ENROLL);
> +		val[0] |= BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_MMIO_GUARD_MAP);
> +		val[0] |= BIT(ARM_SMCCC_KVM_FUNC_MMIO_GUARD_UNMAP);
>  		break;
>  	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FUNC_ID:
>  		kvm_ptp_get_time(vcpu, val);
>  		break;
> +	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_MMIO_GUARD_INFO_FUNC_ID:
> +		val[0] = PAGE_SIZE;
> +		break;

I get the nagging feeling that querying the stage-2 page-size outside of
MMIO guard is going to be useful once we start looking at memory sharing,
so perhaps rename this to something more generic?

> +	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_MMIO_GUARD_ENROLL_FUNC_ID:
> +		set_bit(KVM_ARCH_FLAG_MMIO_GUARD, &vcpu->kvm->arch.flags);
> +		val[0] = SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS;
> +		break;
> +	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_MMIO_GUARD_MAP_FUNC_ID:
> +		if (kvm_install_ioguard_page(vcpu, vcpu_get_reg(vcpu, 1)))
> +			val[0] = SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS;
> +		break;
> +	case ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_MMIO_GUARD_UNMAP_FUNC_ID:
> +		if (kvm_remove_ioguard_page(vcpu, vcpu_get_reg(vcpu, 1)))
> +			val[0] = SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS;
> +		break;

I think there's a slight discrepancy between MAP and UNMAP here in that
calling UNMAP on something that hasn't been mapped will fail, whereas
calling MAP on something that's already been mapped will succeed. I think
that might mean you can't reason about the final state of the page if two
vCPUs race to call these functions in some cases (and both succeed).

Will