linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v16 12/13] x86/tsc: Switch to native sched clock

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: <Z36vqqTgrZp5Y3ab@google.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 09:02:34 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: "Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thomas.lendacky@....com, 
	x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, pgonda@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, 
	francescolavra.fl@...il.com, Alexey Makhalov <alexey.makhalov@...adcom.com>, 
	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 12/13] x86/tsc: Switch to native sched clock

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 06:00:59AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Ideally, if the TSC is the preferred clocksource, then the scheduler will use the
> > TSC and not a PV clock irrespective of STSC.  But I 100% agree with Boris that
> > it needs buy-in from other maintainers (including Paolo), because it's entirely
> > possible (likely, even) that there's an angle to scheduling I'm not considering.
> 
> That's exactly why I wanted to have this taken care of only for the STSC side
> of things now and temporarily. So that we can finally land those STSC patches
> - they've been pending for waaay too long.
> 
> And then ask Nikunj nicely to clean up this whole pv clock gunk, potentially
> kill some of those old clocksources which probably don't matter anymore.
> 
> But your call how/when you wanna do this.

I'm okay starting with just TDX and SNP guests, but I don't want to special case
SNP's Secure TSC anywhere in kvmclock or common TSC/sched code.

For TDX guests, the TSC is _always_ "secure".  So similar to singling out kvmclock,
handling SNP's STSC but not the TDX case again leaves the kernel in an inconsistent
state.  Which is why I originally suggested[*] fixing the sched_clock mess in a
generically; doing so would avoid the need to special case SNP or TDX in code
that doesn't/shouldn't care about SNP or TDX.

[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZurCbP7MesWXQbqZ@google.com

> If you want the cleanup first, I'll take only a subset of the STSC set so that
> I can unload some of that set upstream.

My vote is to apply through "x86/sev: Mark Secure TSC as reliable clocksource",
and then split "x86/tsc: Switch Secure TSC guests away from kvm-clock" to grab
only the snp_secure_tsc_init() related changes (which is how that patch should
be constructed no matter what; adding support for MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ has
nothing to do with kvmclock).

And then figure out how to wrangle clocksource and sched_clock in a way that is
sane and consistent.