linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 06/20] x86/virt/tdx: Shut down TDX module in case of error

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: <52b2be9b-defd-63ce-4cb2-96cd624a95a6@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 07:14:14 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, ying.huang@...el.com,
        reinette.chatre@...el.com, len.brown@...el.com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, isaku.yamahata@...el.com,
        chao.gao@...el.com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com,
        bagasdotme@...il.com, sagis@...gle.com, imammedo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/20] x86/virt/tdx: Shut down TDX module in case of
 error

On 11/22/22 01:13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 01:26:28PM +1300, Kai Huang wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * Call the SEAMCALL on all online CPUs concurrently.  Caller to check
>> + * @sc->err to determine whether any SEAMCALL failed on any cpu.
>> + */
>> +static void seamcall_on_each_cpu(struct seamcall_ctx *sc)
>> +{
>> +	on_each_cpu(seamcall_smp_call_function, sc, true);
>> +}
> 
> Suppose the user has NOHZ_FULL configured, and is already running
> userspace that will terminate on interrupt (this is desired feature for
> NOHZ_FULL), guess how happy they'll be if someone, on another parition,
> manages to tickle this TDX gunk?

Yeah, they'll be none too happy.

But, what do we do?

There are technical solutions like detecting if NOHZ_FULL is in play and
refusing to initialize TDX.  There are also non-technical solutions like
telling folks in the documentation that they better modprobe kvm early
if they want to do TDX, or their NOHZ_FULL apps will pay.

We could also force the TDX module to be loaded early in boot before
NOHZ_FULL is in play, but that would waste memory on TDX metadata even
if TDX is never used.

How do NOHZ_FULL folks deal with late microcode updates, for example?
Those are roughly equally disruptive to all CPUs.