linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] KVM: x86: add force_intercept_exceptions

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: <3221c2385e1148fe0ee77d4717b52726e1db9d8d.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 09 Mar 2022 14:31:02 +0200
From:   Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, Kieran Bingham <kbingham@...nel.org>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
        Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] KVM: x86: add force_intercept_exceptions_mask

On Tue, 2022-03-08 at 23:37 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-09-02 at 16:56 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Assuming this hasn't been abandoned...
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > > This parameter will be used by VMX and SVM code to force
> > > > interception of a set of exceptions, given by a bitmask
> > > > for guest debug and/or kvm debug.
> > > > 
> > > > This is based on an idea first shown here:
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/kvm/patch/20160301192822.GD22677@pd.tnic/
> > > > 
> > > > CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
> > > >  arch/x86/kvm/x86.h | 2 ++
> > > >  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > > > index fdc0c18339fb..092e2fad3c0d 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > > > @@ -184,6 +184,9 @@ module_param(force_emulation_prefix, bool, S_IRUGO);
> > > >  int __read_mostly pi_inject_timer = -1;
> > > >  module_param(pi_inject_timer, bint, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR);
> > > >  
> > > > +uint force_intercept_exceptions_mask;
> > > > +module_param(force_intercept_exceptions_mask, uint, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR);
> > > 
> > > Use octal permissions.  This also can't be a simple writable param, at least not
> > > without a well-documented disclaimer, as there's no guarantee a vCPU will update
> > > its exception bitmap in a timely fashion.  An alternative to a module param would
> > > be to extend/add a per-VM ioctl(), e.g. maybe KVM_SET_GUEST_DEBUG?  The downside
> > > of an ioctl() is that it would require userspace enabling :-/
> > > 
> > 
> > All other module params in this file use macros for permissions, that is why
> > I used them too.
> > 
> > I'll add a comment with a disclaimer here - this is only for debug.
> > I strongly don't want to have this as ioctl as that will indeed need qemu patches,
> > not to mention things like unit tests and which don't even always use qemu.
> > 
> > Or I can make this parameter read-only. I don't mind reloading kvm module when
> > I change this parameter.
> 
> Oh!  We can force an update, a la nx_huge_pages, where the setter loops through
> all VMs and does a kvm_make_all_cpus_request() to instruct vCPUs to update their
> bitmaps.  Requires a new request, but that doesn't seem like a huge deal, and it
> might help pave the way for adding more debug hooks for developers.

Question: is it worth it? Since I am very busy with various things, this feature,
beeing just small debug help which I used once in a while doesn't get much time from me.

I can implement this in the future no doubt.

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky

> 
> The param should also be "unsafe".

I didn't knew about unsafe parameters until recently. I can mark it as such,
no objections.

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky

> 
> E.g. something like
> 
> static const struct kernel_param_ops force_ex_intercepts_ops = {
> 	.set = set_force_exception_intercepts,
> 	.get = get_force_exception_intercepts,
> };
> module_param_cb_unsafe(force_exception_intercepts, &force_ex_intercepts_ops,
> 		       &force_exception_intercepts, 0644);
>