linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: x86: Update guest cpu_caps at runtime for dynamic CPUID-based features

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: <bc2534fe-ade3-496e-a1be-bb2196fb2003@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Nov 2023 10:24:02 +0800
From:   "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CC:     "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: x86: Update guest cpu_caps at runtime for
 dynamic CPUID-based features

On 11/11/2023 7:55 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> When updating guest CPUID entries to emulate runtime behavior, e.g. when
> the guest enables a CR4-based feature that is tied to a CPUID flag, also
> update the vCPU's cpu_caps accordingly.  This will allow replacing all
> usage of guest_cpuid_has() with guest_cpu_cap_has().
>
> Take care not to update guest capabilities when KVM is updating CPUID
> entries that *may* become the vCPU's CPUID, e.g. if userspace tries to set
> bogus CPUID information.  No extra call to update cpu_caps is needed as
> the cpu_caps are initialized from the incoming guest CPUID, i.e. will
> automatically get the updated values.
>
> Note, none of the features in question use guest_cpu_cap_has() at this
> time, i.e. aside from settings bits in cpu_caps, this is a glorified nop.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> ---
>   arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> index 36bd04030989..37a991439fe6 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> @@ -262,31 +262,48 @@ static u64 cpuid_get_supported_xcr0(struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entries, int nent)
>   	return (best->eax | ((u64)best->edx << 32)) & kvm_caps.supported_xcr0;
>   }
>   
> +static __always_inline void kvm_update_feature_runtime(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> +						       struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry,
> +						       unsigned int x86_feature,
> +						       bool has_feature)
> +{
> +	if (entry)
> +		cpuid_entry_change(entry, x86_feature, has_feature);
> +
> +	if (vcpu)
> +		guest_cpu_cap_change(vcpu, x86_feature, has_feature);
> +}
> +
>   static void __kvm_update_cpuid_runtime(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entries,
>   				       int nent)
>   {
>   	struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *best;
> +	struct kvm_vcpu *caps = vcpu;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Don't update vCPU capabilities if KVM is updating CPUID entries that
> +	 * are coming in from userspace!
> +	 */
> +	if (entries != vcpu->arch.cpuid_entries)
> +		caps = NULL;

Nit, why here we use caps instead of vcpu? Looks a bit weird.

>   
>   	best = cpuid_entry2_find(entries, nent, 1, KVM_CPUID_INDEX_NOT_SIGNIFICANT);
> -	if (best) {
> -		/* Update OSXSAVE bit */
> -		if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))
> -			cpuid_entry_change(best, X86_FEATURE_OSXSAVE,
> +
> +	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))
> +		kvm_update_feature_runtime(caps, best, X86_FEATURE_OSXSAVE,
>   					   kvm_is_cr4_bit_set(vcpu, X86_CR4_OSXSAVE));
>   
> -		cpuid_entry_change(best, X86_FEATURE_APIC,
> -			   vcpu->arch.apic_base & MSR_IA32_APICBASE_ENABLE);
> +	kvm_update_feature_runtime(caps, best, X86_FEATURE_APIC,
> +				   vcpu->arch.apic_base & MSR_IA32_APICBASE_ENABLE);
>   
> -		if (!kvm_check_has_quirk(vcpu->kvm, KVM_X86_QUIRK_MISC_ENABLE_NO_MWAIT))
> -			cpuid_entry_change(best, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT,
> -					   vcpu->arch.ia32_misc_enable_msr &
> -					   MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_MWAIT);
> -	}
> +	if (!kvm_check_has_quirk(vcpu->kvm, KVM_X86_QUIRK_MISC_ENABLE_NO_MWAIT))
> +		kvm_update_feature_runtime(caps, best, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT,
> +					   vcpu->arch.ia32_misc_enable_msr & MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_MWAIT);

 > 80 characters?

>   
>   	best = cpuid_entry2_find(entries, nent, 7, 0);
> -	if (best && boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PKU))
> -		cpuid_entry_change(best, X86_FEATURE_OSPKE,
> -				   kvm_is_cr4_bit_set(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE));
> +	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PKU))
> +		kvm_update_feature_runtime(caps, best, X86_FEATURE_OSPKE,
> +					   kvm_is_cr4_bit_set(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE));
>   
>   	best = cpuid_entry2_find(entries, nent, 0xD, 0);
>   	if (best)
> @@ -353,6 +370,9 @@ static void kvm_vcpu_after_set_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   	 * Reset guest capabilities to userspace's guest CPUID definition, i.e.
>   	 * honor userspace's definition for features that don't require KVM or
>   	 * hardware management/support (or that KVM simply doesn't care about).
> +	 *
> +	 * Note, KVM has already done runtime updates on guest CPUID, i.e. this
> +	 * will also correctly set runtime features in guest CPU capabilities.
>   	 */
>   	for (i = 0; i < NR_KVM_CPU_CAPS; i++) {
>   		const struct cpuid_reg cpuid = reverse_cpuid[i];
Reviewed-by: Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>