linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] KVM: selftests: Test pmu event filter with incompatible kvm_pmu_event

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]

Date:   Thu, 25 May 2023 10:19:44 +0800
From:   Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] KVM: selftests: Test pmu event filter with
 incompatible kvm_pmu_event_filter

Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> 于2023年5月25日周四 07:50写道：
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023, Jinrong Liang wrote:
> > From: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>
> >
> > From: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>
> >
> > Add test to verify the behavior of the pmu event filter when an
> > incomplete kvm_pmu_event_filter structure is used. By running the
> > test, we can ensure that the pmu event filter correctly handles
> > incomplete structures and does not allow events to be counted when
> > they should not be.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>
> > ---
> >  .../kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c        | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> > index 9be4c6f8fb7e..a6b6e0d086ae 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c
> > @@ -881,6 +881,24 @@ static bool fixed_ctr_is_allowed(uint8_t idx, uint32_t action, uint32_t bitmap)
> >               (action == KVM_PMU_EVENT_DENY && !(bitmap & BIT_ULL(idx)));
> >  }
> >
> > +struct incompatible_pmu_event_filter {
> > +     __u32 action;
> > +     __u32 nevents;
> > +     __u32 fixed_counter_bitmap;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static uint64_t test_incompatible_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint32_t action,
> > +                                      uint32_t bitmap)
> > +{
> > +     struct incompatible_pmu_event_filter err_f;
> > +
> > +     err_f.action = action;
> > +     err_f.fixed_counter_bitmap = bitmap;
> > +     ioctl((vcpu->vm)->fd, KVM_SET_PMU_EVENT_FILTER, &err_f.action);
>
> This is completely busted.  It "passes" by luck, not because it's a valid test.
> The size of the argument is embedded in the IOCTL number itself, which means that
> unless glibc is being very nice and using a macro + typeof + sizeof to sanity check
> things, which I highly doubt is the case, this ioctl() is passing random stack data,
> a.k.a. garbage, to KVM.
>
> In short, drop this patch.

Thank you for letting us know about the issues with the patch. I will
drop the patch as suggested. Would you advise me to prepare version 3
to remove this patch?