linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/8] x86/mmu: Add mm-based PASID refcounting

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: <YVSlVv/j+WKftUU5@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Sep 2021 10:41:42 -0700
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Jacob Jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] x86/mmu: Add mm-based PASID refcounting

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 07:15:53PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29 2021 at 09:59, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On 9/29/21 05:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Looking at that patch again, none of this muck in fpu__pasid_write() is
> >> required at all. The whole exception fixup is:
> >> 
> >>      if (!user_mode(regs))
> >>               return false;
> >> 
> >>      if (!current->mm->pasid)
> >>               return false;
> >> 
> >>      if (current->pasid_activated)
> >>      	     return false;
> >
> > <-- preemption or BH here: kaboom.
> 
> Sigh, this had obviously to run in the early portion of #GP, i.e. before
> enabling interrupts.

Like this? Obviously with some comment about why this is being done.

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
index a58800973aed..a848a59291e7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
@@ -536,6 +536,12 @@ DEFINE_IDTENTRY_ERRORCODE(exc_general_protection)
 	unsigned long gp_addr;
 	int ret;
 
+	if (user_mode(regs) && current->mm->pasid && !current->pasid_activated) {
+		current->pasid_activated = 1;
+		wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_PASID, current->mm->pasid | MSR_IA32_PASID_VALID);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	cond_local_irq_enable(regs);
 
 	if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_UMIP)) {

-Tony