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: <CAAAPnDH_6EhaXG-TxgPKM-yPTjkNU-Dx7FV_BJs+YLW=t-vMnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2023 14:04:18 +0000
From:   Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] KVM: x86: Fix unpermitted XTILE CPUID reporting

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 5:34 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > This is v4 of Aaron's "Clean up the supported xfeatures" series.
> >
> > Fix a bug where KVM treats/reports XTILE_CFG as supported without
> > XTILE_DATA being supported if userspace queries the supported CPUID but
> > doesn't request access to AMX, a.k.a. XTILE_DATA.  If userspace reflects
> > that CPUID info back into KVM, the resulting VM may use it verbatim and
> > attempt to shove bad data into XCR0: XTILE_CFG and XTILE_DATA must be
> > set/cleared as a pair in XCR0, despite being enumerated separately.
> >
> > This is effectively compile-tested only on my end.
>
> Aaron, can you give this series a quick spin (and review) to make sure it works
> as intended?  I'd like to get this into 6.4, but I'd really like it to be tested
> on AMX hardware first.

LGTM.  I ran the test on SPR and it worked as intended.  I also tried
it with the dynamic feature enabled, i.e. XTILEDATA, and that also
worked as expected.

The first run the guest XCR0 was 0x2e7 and all tests passed.  The
second run the guest XCR0 was 0x602e7 and all tests passed again.

Reviewed-by: Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>
Tested-by: Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ