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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 19:31:36 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        dave.hansen@...el.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 Tue, Nov 22, 2022, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 04:06:25PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22 2022 at 10:20, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 01:26:28PM +1300, Kai Huang wrote:
> > >
> > >> Shutting down the TDX module requires calling TDH.SYS.LP.SHUTDOWN on all
> > >> BIOS-enabled CPUs, and the SEMACALL can run concurrently on different
> > >> CPUs.  Implement a mechanism to run SEAMCALL concurrently on all online
> > >> CPUs and use it to shut down the module.  Later logical-cpu scope module
> > >> initialization will use it too.
> > >
> > > Uhh, those requirements ^ are not met by this:
> > 
> >   Can run concurrently != Must run concurrently
> >  
> > The documentation clearly says "can run concurrently" as quoted above.
> 
> The next sentense says: "Implement a mechanism to run SEAMCALL
> concurrently" -- it does not.
> 
> Anyway, since we're all in agreement there is no such requirement at
> all, a schedule_on_each_cpu() might be more appropriate, there is no
> reason to use IPIs and spin-waiting for any of this.

Backing up a bit, what's the reason for _any_ of this?  The changelog says

  It's pointless to leave the TDX module in some middle state.

but IMO it's just as pointless to do a shutdown unless the kernel benefits in
some meaningful way.  And IIUC, TDH.SYS.LP.SHUTDOWN does nothing more than change
the SEAM VMCS.HOST_RIP to point to an error trampoline.  E.g. it's not like doing
a shutdown lets the kernel reclaim memory that was gifted to the TDX module.

In other words, this is just a really expensive way of changing a function pointer,
and the only way it would ever benefit the kernel is if there is a kernel bug that
leads to trying to use TDX after a fatal error.  And even then, the only difference
seems to be that subsequent bogus SEAMCALLs would get a more unique error message.