linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: preserve interrupt shadow across SMM entries

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YqC1rWUNS64LPhoN@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jun 2022 14:43:57 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: preserve interrupt shadow across SMM entries

On Wed, Jun 08, 2022, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-06-07 at 19:22 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > On 6/7/22 17:16, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > > If the #SMI happens while the vCPU is in the interrupt shadow,
> > > > (after STI or MOV SS),
> > > > we must both clear it to avoid VM entry failure on VMX,
> > > > due to consistency check vs EFLAGS.IF which is cleared on SMM entries,
> > > > and restore it on RSM so that #SMI is transparent to the non SMM code.
> > > > 
> > > > To support migration, reuse upper 4 bits of
> > > > 'kvm_vcpu_events.interrupt.shadow' to store the smm interrupt shadow.
> > > > 
> > > > This was lightly tested with a linux guest and smm load script,
> > > > and a unit test will be soon developed to test this better.
> > > > 
> > > > For discussion: there are other ways to fix this issue:
> > > > 
> > > > 1. The SMM shadow can be stored in SMRAM at some unused
> > > > offset, this will allow to avoid changes to kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_set_vcpu_events
> > > 
> > > Yes, that would be better (and would not require a new cap).
> > 
> > At one point do we chalk up SMM emulation as a failed experiment and deprecate
> > support?  There are most definitely more bugs lurking in KVM's handling of
> > save/restore across SMI+RSM.
> 
> I also kind of agree that SMM was kind of a mistake but these days VMs with secure
> boot use it, so we can't stop supporting this.

Ugh, found the KVM forum presentation. That's unfortunate :-(

> So do you also agree that I write the interrupt shadow to smram?

Yep, unless we want to block SMIs in shadows, which I don't think is allowed by
AMD's architecture.  Using a micro-architecture specific field in SMRAM is how
actual silicon would preserve the state.