linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 10/21] KVM:x86: Add #CP support in guest exception classification

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: <8ae1bf2e-48d1-4c9b-4dc3-398c8e199247@intel.com>
Date:   Sat, 1 Jul 2023 09:58:51 +0800
From:   "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Gil Neiger <gil.neiger@...el.com>
CC:     Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>,
        "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "rppt@...nel.org" <rppt@...nel.org>,
        "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rick P Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        "john.allen@....com" <john.allen@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/21] KVM:x86: Add #CP support in guest exception
 classification


On 6/30/2023 11:15 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023, Gil Neiger wrote:
>> Intel will not produce any CPU with CET that does not enumerate IA32_VMX_BASIC[56] as 1.
>>
>> One can check that bit before injecting a #CP with error code, but it should
>> not be necessary if CET is enumerated.
>>
>> Of course, if the KVM may run as a guest of another VMM/hypervisor, it may be
>> that the virtual CPU in which KVM operates may enumerate CET but clear the
>> bit in IA32_VMX_BASIC.
> Yeah, I think KVM should be paranoid and expose CET to the guest if and only if
> IA32_VMX_BASIC[56] is 1.  That'll also help validate nested support, e.g. will
> make it more obvious if userspace+KVM provides a  "bad" model to L1.

OK, will do it, thanks you two!