linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: restore special vmmcall code layout needed by the harness

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <904ecd64fb5d0ae3512bb595ea326383e4099d54.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Dec 2022 11:53:29 +0200
From:   mlevitsk@...hat.com
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: restore special vmmcall code layout
 needed by the harness

On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 15:48 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 10:28 +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> writes:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > > Commit 8fda37cf3d41 ("KVM: selftests: Stuff RAX/RCX with 'safe' values
> > > > in vmmcall()/vmcall()", 2022-11-21) broke the svm_nested_soft_inject_test
> > > > because it placed a "pop rbp" instruction after vmmcall.  While this is
> > > > correct and mimics what is done in the VMX case, this particular test
> > > > expects a ud2 instruction right after the vmmcall, so that it can skip
> > > > over it in the L1 part of the test.
> > > > 
> > > > Inline a suitably-modified version of vmmcall() to restore the
> > > > functionality of the test.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 8fda37cf3d41 ("KVM: selftests: Stuff RAX/RCX with 'safe' values in vmmcall()/vmcall()"
> > > > Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > We really, really need to save/restore guest GPRs in L1 when handling exits from L2.
> > 
> > +1, the amount of stuff we do to workaround the shortcoming (and time
> > we waste debugging) is getting ridiculously high. 
> > 
> > > For now,
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> > > 
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
> > 
> 
> I didn't notice this fix and also found this issue.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
> 
> Best regards,
> 	Maxim Levitsky

Seems that this patch got through the cracks,
pinging so someone else won't need to debug this
test too.

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky