[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mpbfcnfnqthq32rsn57ge2ypkhzpa3kqxpr2u3rqodxur66voy@zsavzwkxqkhz>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 12:50:43 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cho@...rosoft.com, decui@...rosoft.com,
John.Starks@...rosoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/tdx: Generate SIGBUS on userspace MMIO
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 09:16:13AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 6/10/24 06:55, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >> Enlightened userspace may choose to handle MMIO on their own if the
> >> kernel does not emulate it.
> >>
> >> Handle the EPT_VIOLATION exit reason for userspace and deliver SIGBUS
> >> instead of SIGSEGV. SIGBUS is more appropriate for the MMIO situation.
> > Is any userspace _actually_ doing this? Sure, SIGBUS is more
> > appropriate but in practice unprepared userspace crashes either way.
>
> I also can't help but wonder if there's a better way to do this.
>
> Just thinking out loud.... Ideally, we'd reject creating a potentially
> troublesome VMA at mmap() time. That's way better than, for instance,
> panic()'ing at some random place in the middle of program execution.
I am not sure I follow.
panic() is only for catastrophic cases: VMM pulled memory from under us or
we mapped unaccepted memory into userspace. It should never happen.
We have the same check is_private_gpa() in virt_exception_kernel().
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists