linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with cc_platform

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8ed60226-b3f2-1226-3ce8-afc58acbe1e5@amd.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Sep 2021 08:31:46 -0500
From:   Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-graphics-maintainer@...are.com,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with
 cc_platform_has()

On 9/24/21 4:51 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:41:32PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 08:21:03PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:05:58AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>> Unless we find other way to guarantee RIP-relative access, we must use
>>>> fixup_pointer() to access any global variables.
>>>
>>> Yah, I've asked compiler folks about any guarantees we have wrt
>>> rip-relative addresses but it doesn't look good. Worst case, we'd have
>>> to do the fixup_pointer() thing.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, Tom and I did some more poking at this and here's a
>>> diff ontop.
>>>
>>> The direction being that we'll stick both the AMD and Intel
>>> *cc_platform_has() call into cc_platform.c for which instrumentation
>>> will be disabled so no issues with that.
>>>
>>> And that will keep all that querying all together in a single file.
>>
>> And still do cc_platform_has() calls in __startup_64() codepath?
>>
>> It's broken.
>>
>> Intel detection in cc_platform_has() relies on boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor
>> which is not initialized until early_cpu_init() in setup_arch(). Given
>> that X86_VENDOR_INTEL is 0 it leads to false-positive.
> 
> Yeah, Tom, I had the same question yesterday.
> 
> /me looks in his direction.
> 

Yup, all the things we talked about.

But we also know that cc_platform_has() gets called a few other times 
before boot_cpu_data is initialized - so more false-positives. For 
cc_platform_has() to work properly, given the desire to consolidate the 
calls, IMO, Intel will have to come up with some early setting that can be 
enabled and checked in place of boot_cpu_data or else you live with 
false-positives.

Thanks,
Tom

> :-)
>