linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/11] KVM: x86: Advertise CPUID.7.2.EDX and RRSBA

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]

Message-ID: <ZDvDAlc/TOrIjvlS@chao-env>
Date:   Sun, 16 Apr 2023 21:25:50 +0800
From:   Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
To:     Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Jiaan Lu <jiaan.lu@...el.com>,
        Zhang Chen <chen.zhang@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/11] KVM: x86: Advertise CPUID.7.2.EDX and
 RRSBA_CTRL support

On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 03:04:59PM +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
>
>On 4/14/2023 2:25 PM, Chao Gao wrote:
>> From: Zhang Chen <chen.zhang@...el.com>
>> 
>> Add a kvm-only CPUID feature leaf for CPUID.7.2.EDX and RRSBA_CTRL
>> as the first feature in the leaf.
>> 
>> RRSBA_CTRL is enumerated by CPUID.7.2.EDX[2]. If supported, RRSBA_DIS_U
>> (bit 5) and RRSBA_DIS_S (bit 6) of IA32_SPEC_CTRL MSR can be used to
>> disable RRSBA behavior for CPL3 and CPL0/1/2 respectively.
>> 
>> Note that KVM does not intercept guests' IA32_SPEC_CTRL MSR accesses
>> after a non-zero is written to the MSR. Therefore, guests can already
>> toggle the two bits if the host supports RRSBA_CTRL, and no extra code
>> is needed to allow guests to toggle the two bits.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Zhang Chen <chen.zhang@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
>> Tested-by: Jiaan Lu <jiaan.lu@...el.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c         | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
>>   arch/x86/kvm/reverse_cpuid.h |  7 +++++++
>>   2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
>> index 9583a110cf5f..f024c3ac2203 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
>> @@ -685,6 +685,10 @@ void kvm_set_cpu_caps(void)
>>   		SF(SGX1) | SF(SGX2) | SF(SGX_EDECCSSA)
>>   	);
>> +	kvm_cpu_cap_init_kvm_defined(CPUID_7_2_EDX,
>> +		SF(RRSBA_CTRL)
>> +	);
>> +
>
>Is it slightly better to put the new added one after
>
>    kvm_cpu_cap_init_kvm_defined(CPUID_7_1_EDX, ...
>
>to make it in order?

Yes. Will do.