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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <273a7631-188b-a7a9-a551-4e577dcdd8d1@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 17:46:58 +0800 From: Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com> To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] KVM: x86/pmu: Clear reserved bit PERF_CTL2[43] for AMD erratum 1292 On 3/3/2022 1:52 am, Jim Mattson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 3:14 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com> wrote: >> >> From: Like Xu <likexu@...cent.com> >> >> The AMD Family 19h Models 00h-0Fh Processors may experience sampling >> inaccuracies that cause the following performance counters to overcount >> retire-based events. To count the non-FP affected PMC events correctly, >> a patched guest with a target vCPU model would: >> >> - Use Core::X86::Msr::PERF_CTL2 to count the events, and >> - Program Core::X86::Msr::PERF_CTL2[43] to 1b, and >> - Program Core::X86::Msr::PERF_CTL2[20] to 0b. >> >> To support this use of AMD guests, KVM should not reserve bit 43 >> only for counter #2. Treatment of other cases remains unchanged. >> >> AMD hardware team clarified that the conditions under which the >> overcounting can happen, is quite rare. This change may make those >> PMU driver developers who have read errata #1292 less disappointed. >> >> Reported-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com> >> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <likexu@...cent.com> > > This seems unnecessarily convoluted. As I've said previously, KVM > should not ever synthesize a #GP for any value written to a > PerfEvtSeln MSR when emulating an AMD CPU. IMO, we should "never synthesize a #GP" for all AMD MSRs, not just for AMD PMU msrs, or keep the status quo. I agree with you on this AMD #GP transition, but we need at least one kernel cycle to make a more radical change and we don't know Paolo's attitude and more, we haven't received a tidal wave of user complaints.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists