linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests: KVM: avoid failures due to reserved HyperTransport region

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: <33d01b8bb31541be7911f95581cdf608c6c79bf6.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 09 Aug 2021 10:45:27 +0300
From:   Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
To:     Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: KVM: avoid failures due to reserved
 HyperTransport region

On Fri, 2021-08-06 at 11:57 +0100, Joao Martins wrote:
> 
> On 8/5/21 11:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Accessing guest physical addresses at 0xFFFD_0000_0000 and above causes
> > a failure on AMD processors because those addresses are reserved by
> > HyperTransport (this is not documented).  
> 
> Oh, but it's actually documented in the AMD IOMMU manual [0] (and AMD IOMMU in linux do
> mark it as a reserved IOVA region i.e. HT_RANGE_START..HT_RANGE_END). And it's usually
> marked as a reserved type in E820. At least on the machines I've seen.
> 
> See manual section '2.1.2 IOMMU Logical Topology':
> 
> "Special address controls in Table 3 are interpreted against untranslated guest physical
> addressess (GPA) that lack a PASID TLP prefix."
> 
>  Base Address   Top Address   Use
> 
>   FD_0000_0000h FD_F7FF_FFFFh Reserved interrupt address space
>   FD_F800_0000h FD_F8FF_FFFFh Interrupt/EOI IntCtl
>   FD_F900_0000h FD_F90F_FFFFh Legacy PIC IACK
>   FD_F910_0000h FD_F91F_FFFFh System Management
>   FD_F920_0000h FD_FAFF_FFFFh Reserved Page Tables
>   FD_FB00_0000h FD_FBFF_FFFFh Address Translation
>   FD_FC00_0000h FD_FDFF_FFFFh I/O Space
>   FD_FE00_0000h FD_FFFF_FFFFh Configuration
>   FE_0000_0000h FE_1FFF_FFFFh Extended Configuration/Device Messages
>   FE_2000_0000h FF_FFFF_FFFFh Reserved
> 
> It covers the range starting that address you fixed up ... up to 1Tb, fwiw.
> 
> You mark it ~1010G as max gfn so shouldn't be a problem.
> 
> [0] https://www.amd.com/system/files/TechDocs/48882_IOMMU.pdf
> 
> > Avoid selftests failures
> > by reserving those guest physical addresses.
> > 
> > Fixes: ef4c9f4f6546 ("KVM: selftests: Fix 32-bit truncation of vm_get_max_gfn()")
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>
> > Reported-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> > index 10a8ed691c66..d995cc9836ee 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
> > @@ -309,6 +309,12 @@ struct kvm_vm *vm_create(enum vm_guest_mode mode, uint64_t phy_pages, int perm)
> >  	/* Limit physical addresses to PA-bits. */
> >  	vm->max_gfn = ((1ULL << vm->pa_bits) >> vm->page_shift) - 1;
> >  
> > +#ifdef __x86_64__
> > +	/* Avoid reserved HyperTransport region on AMD processors.  */
> > +	if (vm->pa_bits == 48)
> > +		vm->max_gfn = 0xfffcfffff;
> > +#endif
> > +
> 
> Not sure if it's worth the trouble having a macro with the same name as AMD iommu like:
> 
> #define HT_RANGE_START                (0xfd00000000ULL)
> #define MAX_GFN			      (HT_RANGE_START - 1ULL)
> 
> #ifdef __x86_64__
> 	/* Avoid reserved HyperTransport region on AMD processors.  */
> 	if (vm->pa_bits == 48)
> 		vm->max_gfn = MAX_GFN;
> #endif

I guess now that we know that it is documented, it is worth it,
to remove '== 48' check and add check for an AMD cpu, and add reference
to this manual.

I am mentioning the 48 bit check because I have seen that AMD just recently
posted 5 level NPT support, so I guess CPUs which > 48 bit max physical address
are also probably on horison.

And long term solution for this I guess is to add these areas to a blacklist
and avoid them.

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky

> 
> It's a detail, but *perhaps* would help people grepping around it.
> 
> Also, not sure if checking against AMD cpuid vendor is worth, considering this is
> a limitation only on AMD.
> 
> 
> >  	/* Allocate and setup memory for guest. */
> >  	vm->vpages_mapped = sparsebit_alloc();
> >  	if (phy_pages != 0)
> >