linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 13/16] x86: decouple PAT and MTRR handling

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: <20221202132701.ymcp7a2yv3st33so@box.shutemov.name>
Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2022 16:27:01 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/16] x86: decouple PAT and MTRR handling

On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 06:56:47AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 02.12.22 00:57, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 05:33:28PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > On 01.12.22 17:26, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 08:47:10AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > > > Today PAT is usable only with MTRR being active, with some nasty tweaks
> > > > > to make PAT usable when running as Xen PV guest, which doesn't support
> > > > > MTRR.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The reason for this coupling is, that both, PAT MSR changes and MTRR
> > > > > changes, require a similar sequence and so full PAT support was added
> > > > > using the already available MTRR handling.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Xen PV PAT handling can work without MTRR, as it just needs to consume
> > > > > the PAT MSR setting done by the hypervisor without the ability and need
> > > > > to change it. This in turn has resulted in a convoluted initialization
> > > > > sequence and wrong decisions regarding cache mode availability due to
> > > > > misguiding PAT availability flags.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fix all of that by allowing to use PAT without MTRR and by reworking
> > > > > the current PAT initialization sequence to match better with the newly
> > > > > introduced generic cache initialization.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This removes the need of the recently added pat_force_disabled flag, so
> > > > > remove the remnants of the patch adding it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
> > > > 
> > > > This patch breaks boot for TDX guest.
> > > > 
> > > > Kernel now tries to set CR0.CD which is forbidden in TDX guest[1] and
> > > > causes #VE:
> > > > 
> > > > 	tdx: Unexpected #VE: 28
> > > > 	VE fault: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
> > > > 	CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 6.1.0-rc1-00015-gadfe7512e1d0 #2646
> > > > 	Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015
> > > > 	RIP: 0010:native_write_cr0 (arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c:427)
> > > > 	 Call Trace:
> > > > 	  <TASK>
> > > > 	 ? cache_disable (arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h:173 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cacheinfo.c:1085)
> > > > 	 ? cache_cpu_init (arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cacheinfo.c:1132 (discriminator 3))
> > > > 	 ? setup_arch (arch/x86/kernel/setup.c:1079)
> > > > 	 ? start_kernel (init/main.c:279 (discriminator 3) init/main.c:477 (discriminator 3) init/main.c:960 (discriminator 3))
> > > > 	 ? load_ucode_bsp (arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c:155)
> > > > 	 ? secondary_startup_64_no_verify (arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S:358)
> > > > 	  </TASK>
> > > > 
> > > > Any suggestion how to fix it?
> > > > 
> > > > [1] Section 10.6.1. "CR0", https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/733568
> > > 
> > > What was the solution before?
> > > 
> > > I guess MTRR was disabled, so there was no PAT, too?
> > 
> > Right:
> > 
> > Linus' tree:
> > 
> > [    0.002589] last_pfn = 0x480000 max_arch_pfn = 0x10000000000
> > [    0.003976] Disabled
> > [    0.004452] x86/PAT: MTRRs disabled, skipping PAT initialization too.
> > [    0.005856] CPU MTRRs all blank - virtualized system.
> > [    0.006915] x86/PAT: Configuration [0-7]: WB  WT  UC- UC  WB  WT  UC- UC
> > 
> > tip/master:
> > 
> > [    0.003443] last_pfn = 0x20b8e max_arch_pfn = 0x10000000000
> > [    0.005220] Disabled
> > [    0.005818] x86/PAT: Configuration [0-7]: WB  WC  UC- UC  WB  WP  UC- WT
> > [    0.007752] tdx: Unexpected #VE: 28
> > 
> > The dangling "Disabled" comes mtrr_bp_init().
> > 
> > 
> > > If this is the case, you can go the same route as Xen PV guests do.
> > 
> > Any reason X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR cannot be used instead of
> > X86_FEATURE_XENPV there?
> > 
> > Do we have any virtualized platform that supports it?
> 
> Yes, of course. Any hardware virtualized guest should be able to use it,
> obviously TDX guests are the first ones not being able to do so.
> 
> And above dmesg snipplets are showing rather nicely that not disabling
> PAT completely should be a benefit for TDX guests, as all caching modes
> would be usable (the PAT MSR seems to be initialized quite fine).
> 
> Instead of X86_FEATURE_XENPV we could introduce something like
> X86_FEATURE_PAT_READONLY, which could be set for Xen PV guests and for
> TDX guests.

Technically, the MSR is writable on TDX. But it seems there's no way to
properly change it, following the protocol of changing on MP systems.

Although, I don't quite follow what role cache disabling playing on system
with self-snoop support. Hm?

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov