linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: let it be known that ignore

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2f3df741-b24f-4940-bef1-514498b561e1@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:12:21 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: let it be known that ignore_msrs is a bad idea

On 12/20/24 18:03, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> When running KVM with ignore_msrs=1 and report_ignored_msrs=0, the user has
>> no clue that that the guest is being lied to.  This may cause bug reports
>> such as https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/2571, where enabling
>> a CPUID bit in QEMU caused Linux guests to try reading MSR_CU_DEF_ERR; and
>> being lied about the existence of MSR_CU_DEF_ERR caused the guest to assume
>> other things about the local APIC which were not true:
>>
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel: mce: [Firmware Bug]: Your BIOS is not setting up LVT offset 0x2 for deferred error IRQs correctly.
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel: unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0x852 at rIP: 0xffffffffb548ffa7 (native_read_msr+0x7/0x40)
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel: Call Trace:
>>    ...
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel:  native_apic_msr_read+0x20/0x30
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel:  setup_APIC_eilvt+0x47/0x110
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel:  mce_amd_feature_init+0x485/0x4e0
>>    ...
>>    Sep 14 12:02:53 kernel: [Firmware Bug]: cpu 0, try to use APIC520 (LVT offset 2) for vector 0xf4, but the register is already in use for vector 0x0 on this cpu
>>
>> Without reported_ignored_msrs=0 at least the host kernel log will contain
>> enough information to avoid going on a wild goose chase.  But if reports
>> about individual MSR accesses are being silenced too, at least complain
>> loudly the first time a VM is started.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> index c8160baf3838..1b7c8db0cf63 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> @@ -12724,6 +12724,13 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type)
>>   	kvm_hv_init_vm(kvm);
>>   	kvm_xen_init_vm(kvm);
>>   
>> +	if (ignore_msrs && !report_ignored_msrs) {
>> +		pr_warn_once("Running KVM with ignore_msrs=1 and report_ignored_msrs=0 is not a\n");
>> +		pr_warn_once("a supported configuration.  Lying to the guest about the existence of MSRs\n");
> 
> Back-to-back 'a's.
> 
> If we're saying this combo is unsupported, should we taint the host kernel with
> TAINT_USER, e.g. similar to how the force_avic parameter is treated as unsafe?

I don't think so, TAINT_USER seems to be for cases where there can be 
*host* instability.  Even force_avic is a stretch.

>> +		pr_warn_once("may cause the guest operating system to hang or produce errors.  If a guest\n");
>> +		pr_warn_once("does not run without ignore_msrs=1, please report it to kvm@...r.kernel.org.\n");
> 
> This should be a multi-line string that's printed in a single pr_warn_once(),
> otherwise the full message could get split quite weirdly if there is other dmesg
> activity.

Will do, thanks.

Paolo