linux-kernel - Re: [patch 02/38] x86/cpu: Use native_wrmsrl() in load_percpu

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, 18 Jul 2022 12:33:14 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Johannes Wikner <kwikner@...z.ch>,
        Alyssa Milburn <alyssa.milburn@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
        Joao Moreira <joao.moreira@...el.com>,
        Joseph Nuzman <joseph.nuzman@...el.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 02/38] x86/cpu: Use native_wrmsrl() in
 load_percpu_segment()

On Mon, Jul 18 2022 at 11:31, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:55:29AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 18 2022 at 08:54, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 18 2022 at 07:11, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> >>> -	switch_to_new_gdt(cpu);
>> >>> +	switch_to_real_gdt(cpu);
>> >>
>> >> ... can't you use the paravirt variant of load_gdt in switch_to_real_gdt() ?
>> >
>> > That does not solve the problem of having a disagreement between GDT and
>> > GS_BASE. Let me dig into this some more.
>> 
>> Bah. The real problem is __loadsegment_simple(gs, 0). After that GS_BASE
>> is 0. So any per CPU access before setting MSR_GS_BASE back to working
>> state is going into lala land.
>> 
>> So it's not the GDT. It's the mov 0, %gs which makes stuff go south, but
>> as %gs is already 0, we can keep the paravirt load_gdt() and use
>> native_write_msr() and everything should be happy.
>
> How is the ret from xen_load_gdt() not going to explode?

This is only for the early boot _before_ all the patching happens. So
that goes through the default retthunk.

Secondary CPUs do not need that as they set up GDT and GS_BASE in the
low level asm code before coming out to C.

I'm still trying to figure out how this works on XENPV and on 32bit.

Sigh...