linux-kernel - Re: [Question PATCH kernel] x86/amd/sev/nmi+vc: Fix stack handling (why is this happening?)

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: <38C572D7-E637-48C2-A57A-E62D44FF19BB@zytor.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:30:38 -0800
From:   "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:     Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
CC:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [Question PATCH kernel] x86/amd/sev/nmi+vc: Fix stack handling (why is this happening?)

On January 28, 2023 3:24:56 AM PST, Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@....com> wrote:
>
>
>On 28/1/23 04:25, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 10:56:26PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> https://github.com/aik/linux/commit/d0d6bbb58fcd927ddd1f8e9d42ab121920c7eafc
>> 
>> Okay, I reproduced the problem here and the root cause turned out to be
>> that the compiler moved the DR7 read instruction before the 5-byte NOP
>> which becomes the call to sev_es_ist_enter() in SEV-ES guests. This is
>> guaranteed to cause #VC exception stack recursion if the NMI was
>> triggered on the #VC stack, and that leads to all kinds of undefined
>> behavior.
>
>Cool!
>
>(out of curiosity) where do you see these NOPs? "objdump -D vmlinux" does not show any, is this after lifepatching?
>
>Meanwhile, this seems to be doing the right thing:
>
>
>diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h
>index b049d950612f..687b15297057 100644
>--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h
>+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h
>@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ static __always_inline unsigned long native_get_debugreg(int regno)
>                asm("mov %%db6, %0" :"=r" (val));
>                break;
>        case 7:
>-               asm("mov %%db7, %0" :"=r" (val));
>+               asm volatile ("mov %%db7, %0" :"=r" (val));
>
>
>

It's somewhat odd to me that reading %dr7 is volatile, but %dr6 is not... %dr6 is the status register!

I believe they should all be volatile (the compiler semantics is that volatile operations are always executed exactly once, in strict program order with respect to any other volatile operations); the real question is if there should also be memory clobbers on %dr6 reads and any %dr write.