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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 15:15:25 +0800 From: Hao Xiang <hao.xiang@...ux.alibaba.com> To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chenyi.qiang@...el.com, shannon.zhao@...ux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Check if bus lock vmexit was preempted On 2021/9/22 22:58, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, Xiaoyao Li wrote: >> On 9/22/2021 6:02 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> On 18/09/21 13:30, Hao Xiang wrote: >>>> exit_reason.bus_lock_detected is not only set when bus lock VM exit >>>> was preempted, in fact, this bit is always set if bus locks are >>>> detected no matter what the exit_reason.basic is. >>>> >>>> So the bus_lock_vmexit handling in vmx_handle_exit should be duplicated >>>> when exit_reason.basic is EXIT_REASON_BUS_LOCK(74). We can avoid it by >>>> checking if bus lock vmexit was preempted in vmx_handle_exit. >>> I don't understand, does this mean that bus_lock_detected=1 if >>> basic=EXIT_REASON_BUS_LOCK? If so, can we instead replace the contents >>> of handle_bus_lock_vmexit with >>> >>> /* Do nothing and let vmx_handle_exit exit to userspace. */ >>> WARN_ON(!to_vmx(vcpu)->exit_reason.bus_lock_detected); >>> return 0; >>> >>> ? >>> >>> That would be doable only if this is architectural behavior and not a >>> processor erratum, of course. >> EXIT_REASON.bus_lock_detected may or may not be set when exit reason == >> EXIT_REASON_BUS_LOCK. Intel will update ISE or SDM to state it. >> >> Maybe we can do below in handle_bus_lock_vmexit handler: >> >> if (!to_vmx(vcpu)->exit_reason.bus_lock_detected) >> to_vmx(vcpu)->exit_reason.bus_lock_detected = 1; >> >> But is manually changing the hardware reported value for software purpose a >> good thing? > In this case, I'd say yes. Hardware having non-deterministic behavior is the not > good thing, KVM would simply be correctly the not-technically-an-erratum erratum. > > Set it unconditionally and then handle everything in common path. This has the > added advantage of having only one site that deals with KVM_RUN_X86_BUS_LOCK. > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > index 33f92febe3ce..aa9372452e49 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > @@ -5561,9 +5561,9 @@ static int handle_encls(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > static int handle_bus_lock_vmexit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > - vcpu->run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_X86_BUS_LOCK; > - vcpu->run->flags |= KVM_RUN_X86_BUS_LOCK; > - return 0; > + /* The dedicated flag may or may not be set by hardware. /facepalm. */ > + vcpu->exit_reason.bus_lock_detected = true; > + return 1; > } > > /* > @@ -6050,9 +6050,8 @@ static int vmx_handle_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, fastpath_t exit_fastpath) > int ret = __vmx_handle_exit(vcpu, exit_fastpath); > > /* > - * Even when current exit reason is handled by KVM internally, we > - * still need to exit to user space when bus lock detected to inform > - * that there is a bus lock in guest. > + * Exit to user space when bus lock detected to inform that there is a > + * bus lock in guest. > */ > if (to_vmx(vcpu)->exit_reason.bus_lock_detected) { > if (ret > 0) I agree with your modifications. And I will re-submit the patch. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists