linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unchecked MSR access error for Alder Lake N

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, 22 Aug 2022 10:59:13 -0400
From:   "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     acme@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        Jianfeng Gao <jianfeng.gao@...el.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unchecked MSR access error for
 Alder Lake N



On 2022-08-22 10:39 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 09:28:31AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2022-08-19 10:38 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 11:15:30AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>>>> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> For some Alder Lake N machine, the below unchecked MSR access error may be
>>>> triggered.
>>>>
>>>> [ 0.088017] rcu: Hierarchical SRCU implementation.
>>>> [ 0.088017] unchecked MSR access error: WRMSR to 0x38f (tried to write
>>>> 0x0001000f0000003f) at rIP: 0xffffffffb5684de8 (native_write_msr+0x8/0x30)
>>>> [ 0.088017] Call Trace:
>>>> [ 0.088017] <TASK>
>>>> [ 0.088017] __intel_pmu_enable_all.constprop.46+0x4a/0xa0
>>>
>>> FWIW, I seem to get the same error when booting KVM on my ADL. I'm
>>> fairly sure the whole CPUID vs vCPU thing is a trainwreck.
>>
>> We will enhance the CPUID to address the issues. Hopefully, we can have
>> them supported in the next generation.
>>
> 
> How about this?
> 
> ---
> [    0.170231] Performance Events: Alderlake Hybrid events, full-width counters, Intel PMU driver.
> [    0.171420] core: hybrid PMU and virt are incompatible
> 
> 
>  arch/x86/events/intel/core.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index 2db93498ff71..232e24324fd7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -4473,6 +4473,11 @@ static bool init_hybrid_pmu(int cpu)
>  	struct x86_hybrid_pmu *pmu = NULL;
>  	int i;
>  
> +	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) {
> +		pr_warn_once("hybrid PMU and virt are incompatible\n");
> +		return false;
> +	}

I would expect that KVM exposes the enhanced CPUID to the guest. The
guest vCPU should knows its specific CPU type. The KVM should bind the
vCPU to the same type of CPUs.

Before KVM provides such support, I guess it may be OK to have the
warning. Maybe more specifically, only architecture events work.

Thanks,
Kan

> +
>  	if (!cpu_type && x86_pmu.get_hybrid_cpu_type)
>  		cpu_type = x86_pmu.get_hybrid_cpu_type();
>