linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Update vPMCs when retiring instructions

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: <CALMp9eTq2NwhB5cq_LknUjJncKHK2xPuQ5vpTaDN_zCDPT_JWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 19:37:22 -0800
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To:     Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     "Paolo Bonzini - Distinguished Engineer (kernel-recipes.org)" 
        <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Eric Hankland <ehankland@...gle.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel OTC, Netherlander)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Update vPMCs when retiring instructions

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:01 PM Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 7:22 PM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 17/11/2021 6:15 am, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 4:44 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Jim,
> > >>
> > >> On 13/11/2021 7:52 am, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > >>> When KVM retires a guest instruction through emulation, increment any
> > >>> vPMCs that are configured to monitor "instructions retired," and
> > >>> update the sample period of those counters so that they will overflow
> > >>> at the right time.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Hankland <ehankland@...gle.com>
> > >>> [jmattson:
> > >>>     - Split the code to increment "branch instructions retired" into a
> > >>>       separate commit.
> > >>>     - Added 'static' to kvm_pmu_incr_counter() definition.
> > >>>     - Modified kvm_pmu_incr_counter() to check pmc->perf_event->state ==
> > >>>       PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE.
> > >>> ]
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
> > >>> Fixes: f5132b01386b ("KVM: Expose a version 2 architectural PMU to a guests")
> > >>> ---
> > >>>    arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>    arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h |  1 +
> > >>>    arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |  3 +++
> > >>>    3 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> > >>> index 09873f6488f7..153c488032a5 100644
> > >>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> > >>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> > >>> @@ -490,6 +490,37 @@ void kvm_pmu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > >>>        kvm_pmu_reset(vcpu);
> > >>>    }
> > >>>
> > >>> +static void kvm_pmu_incr_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc, u64 evt)
> > >>> +{
> > >>> +     u64 counter_value, sample_period;
> > >>> +
> > >>> +     if (pmc->perf_event &&
> > >>
> > >> We need to incr pmc->counter whether it has a perf_event or not.
> > >>
> > >>> +         pmc->perf_event->attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE &&
> > >>
> > >> We need to cover PERF_TYPE_RAW as well, for example,
> > >> it has the basic bits for "{ 0xc0, 0x00, PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS },"
> > >> plus HSW_IN_TX or ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_EDGE stuff.
> > >>
> > >> We just need to focus on checking the select and umask bits:
> > >
> > > [What follows applies only to Intel CPUs. I haven't looked at AMD's
> > > PMU implementation yet.]
> >
> > x86 has the same bit definition and semantics on at least the select and umask bits.
>
> Yes, but AMD supports 12 bits of event selector. AMD also has the
> HG_ONLY bits, which affect whether or not to count the event based on
> context.

It looks like we already have an issue with event selector truncation
on the AMD side. It's not clear from the APM if AMD has always had a
12-bit event selector field, but it's 12 bits now. Milan, for example,
has at least 6 different events with selectors > 255. I don't see how
a guest could monitor those events with the existing KVM
implementation.