linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: allow guest to send its

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]

Date:   Mon, 9 May 2022 23:55:04 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Wei Zhang <zhanwei@...gle.com>
Cc:     Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
        Sangwhan Moon <sxm@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: allow guest to send its _stext for kvm
 profiling

On Tue, Apr 12, 2022, Wei Zhang wrote:
> The profiling buffer is indexed by (pc - _stext) in do_profile_hits(),
> which doesn't work for KVM profiling because the pc represents an address
> in the guest kernel. readprofile is broken in this case, unless the guest
> kernel happens to have the same _stext as the host kernel.
> 
> This patch adds a new hypercall so guests could send its _stext to the
> host, which will then be used to adjust the calculation for KVM profiling.

Disclaimer, I know nothing about using profiling.

Why not just omit the _stext adjustment and profile the raw guest RIP?  It seems
like userspace needs to know about the guest layout in order to make use of profling
info, so why not report raw info and let host userspace do all adjustments?

> Signed-off-by: Wei Zhang <zhanwei@...gle.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c            | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h      |  4 ++++
>  include/uapi/linux/kvm_para.h |  1 +
>  virt/kvm/Kconfig              |  5 +++++
>  4 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 547ba00ef64f..abeacdd5d362 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -9246,6 +9246,12 @@ int kvm_emulate_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  		vcpu->arch.complete_userspace_io = complete_hypercall_exit;
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACCURATE_KVM_PROFILING
> +	case KVM_HC_GUEST_STEXT:
> +		vcpu->kvm->guest_stext = a0;

Rather than snapshot the guest offset, snapshot the delta.  E.g.

		vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_stext_offset = (unsigned long)_stext - a0;

Then the profiling flow can just be

		unsigned long rip;

		rip = kvm_rip_read(vcpu) + vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_text_offset;
		profile_hit(KVM_PROFILING, (void *)rip);


> +		ret = 0;
> +		break;
> +#endif
>  	default:
>  		ret = -KVM_ENOSYS;
>  		break;
> @@ -10261,6 +10267,15 @@ static int vcpu_enter_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	 */
>  	if (unlikely(prof_on == KVM_PROFILING)) {
>  		unsigned long rip = kvm_rip_read(vcpu);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACCURATE_KVM_PROFILING

A Kconfig, and really any #define, is completely unnecessary.  This is all x86
code, just throw the offest into struct kvm_arch.