linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/xen: Add support for HVMOP_set_evtchn_upcall

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: <3be61417-6e58-1d9f-dd3c-7de00daa8d0a@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 09:10:58 -0400
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:     Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>,
        Jane Malalane <Jane.Malalane@...rix.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
        Maximilian Heyne <mheyne@...zon.de>,
        Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...el.com>,
        "xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/xen: Add support for HVMOP_set_evtchn_upcall_vector


On 7/15/22 5:50 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 15/07/2022 09:18, Jane Malalane wrote:
>> On 14/07/2022 00:27, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>>        xen_hvm_smp_init();
>>>>        WARN_ON(xen_cpuhp_setup(xen_cpu_up_prepare_hvm, xen_cpu_dead_hvm));
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/suspend_hvm.c b/arch/x86/xen/suspend_hvm.c
>>>> index 9d548b0c772f..be66e027ef28 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/suspend_hvm.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/suspend_hvm.c
>>>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>>>>    #include <xen/hvm.h>
>>>>    #include <xen/features.h>
>>>>    #include <xen/interface/features.h>
>>>> +#include <xen/events.h>
>>>>    #include "xen-ops.h"
>>>> @@ -14,6 +15,23 @@ void xen_hvm_post_suspend(int suspend_cancelled)
>>>>            xen_hvm_init_shared_info();
>>>>            xen_vcpu_restore();
>>>>        }
>>>> -    xen_setup_callback_vector();
>>>> +    if (xen_ack_upcall) {
>>>> +        unsigned int cpu;
>>>> +
>>>> +        for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> +            xen_hvm_evtchn_upcall_vector_t op = {
>>>> +                    .vector = HYPERVISOR_CALLBACK_VECTOR,
>>>> +                    .vcpu = per_cpu(xen_vcpu_id, cpu),
>>>> +            };
>>>> +
>>>> +            BUG_ON(HYPERVISOR_hvm_op(HVMOP_set_evtchn_upcall_vector,
>>>> +                         &op));
>>>> +            /* Trick toolstack to think we are enlightened. */
>>>> +            if (!cpu)
>>>> +                BUG_ON(xen_set_callback_via(1));
>>> What are you trying to make the toolstack aware of? That we have *a*
>>> callback (either global or percpu)?
>> Yes, specifically for the check in libxl__domain_pvcontrol_available.
> And others.
>
> This is all a giant bodge, but basically a lot of tooling uses the
> non-zero-ness of the CALLBACK_VIA param to determine whether the VM has
> Xen-aware drivers loaded or not.
>
> The value 1 is a CALLBACK_VIA value which encodes GSI 1, and the only
> reason this doesn't explode everywhere is because the
> evtchn_upcall_vector registration takes priority over GSI delivery.
>
> This is decades of tech debt piled on top of tech debt.


Feels like it (setting the callback parameter) is something that the hypervisor should do --- no need to expose guests to this.


-boris