linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] x86/msr: Switch between WRMSRNS and WRMSR with the alternatives mechanism

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: <7c09d124-08f1-40b4-813c-f0f74e19497a@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:52:51 -0700
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, seanjc@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] x86/msr: Switch between WRMSRNS and WRMSR with the
 alternatives mechanism

On 8/9/2024 4:07 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 07/08/2024 6:47 am, Xin Li (Intel) wrote:
>> From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
>> +/* Instruction opcode for WRMSRNS supported in binutils >= 2.40 */
>> +#define WRMSRNS _ASM_BYTES(0x0f,0x01,0xc6)
>> +
>> +/* Non-serializing WRMSR, when available.  Falls back to a serializing WRMSR. */
>>   static __always_inline void wrmsrns(u32 msr, u64 val)
>>   {
>> -	__wrmsrns(msr, val, val >> 32);
>> +	/*
>> +	 * WRMSR is 2 bytes.  WRMSRNS is 3 bytes.  Pad WRMSR with a redundant
>> +	 * DS prefix to avoid a trailing NOP.
>> +	 */
>> +	asm volatile("1: "
>> +		     ALTERNATIVE("ds wrmsr",
> 
> This isn't the version I presented, and there's no discussion of the
> alteration.

I'm trying to implement wrmsr() as

static __always_inline void wrmsr(u32 msr, u64 val)
{
	asm volatile("1: " ALTERNATIVE_2("wrmsr", WRMSRNS, X86_FEATURE_WRMSRNS,
					 "call asm_xen_write_msr", X86_FEATURE_XENPV)
		     "2: " _ASM_EXTABLE_TYPE(1b, 2b, EX_TYPE_WRMSR)
		     : : "c" (msr), "a" (val), "d" ((u32)(val >> 32)),
		     "D" (msr), "S" (val));
}


As the CALL instruction is 5-byte long, and we need to pad nop for both
WRMSR and WRMSRNS, what about not using segment prefix at all?


> The choice of CS over DS was deliberate, and came from Intel:
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/support/us/en/documents/processors/mitigations-jump-conditional-code-erratum.pdf
> 
> So unless Intel want to retract that whitepaper, and all the binutils
> work with it, I'd suggest keeping it as CS like we use elsewhere, and as
> explicitly instructed by Intel.