linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: remove LFENCE in vmx_spec_ctrl_restore

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: <21D1D290-7DE9-4864-A05B-A36779D9DC26@nutanix.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 14:29:02 +0000
From:   Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
CC:     Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.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 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com>,
        "kvm @ vger . kernel . org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: remove LFENCE in vmx_spec_ctrl_restore_host()



> On Jun 1, 2023, at 12:23 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 06:24:29PM -0700, Pawan Gupta wrote:
> 
> ## 2023-05-31
>> On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 01:50:48AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 01/06/2023 1:42 am, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>>>> So each LFENCE has a distinct purpose.  That said, there are no indirect
>>>> branches or unbalanced RETs between them.
>>> 
>>> How lucky are you feeling?
>>> 
>>> You're in C at this point, which means the compiler could have emitted a
>>> call to mem{cpy,cmp}() in place of a simple assignment/comparison.
>> 
>> Moving the second LFENCE to the else part of WRMSR should be possible?
>> So that the serialization can be achived either by WRMSR or LFENCE. This
>> saves an LFENCE when host and guest value of MSR_SPEC_CTRL differ.
> 
> Yes.  Though in practice it might not make much of a difference.  With
> wrmsr+lfence, the lfence has nothing to do so it might be almost
> instantaneous anyway.
> 
> -- 
> Josh

Coming back to this, what if we hoisted call vmx_spec_ctrl_restore_host above
FILL_RETURN_BUFFER, and dropped this LFENCE as I did here?

That way, we wouldn’t have to mess with the internal LFENCE in nospec-branch.h,
and that would act as the “final line of defense” LFENCE.

Would that be acceptable? Or does FILL_RETURN_BUFFER *need* to occur
before any sort of calls no matter what?

Thanks,
Jon