linux-kernel - [PATCH v15 40/41] KVM: selftests: Verify MSRs are (not) in save/restore list when (un)supported

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: <20250912232319.429659-41-seanjc@google.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:23:18 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, Mathias Krause <minipli@...ecurity.net>, 
	John Allen <john.allen@....com>, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, 
	Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>, 
	Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, Zhang Yi Z <yi.z.zhang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v15 40/41] KVM: selftests: Verify MSRs are (not) in
 save/restore list when (un)supported

Add a check in the MSRs test to verify that KVM's reported support for
MSRs with feature bits is consistent between KVM's MSR save/restore lists
and KVM's supported CPUID.

To deal with Intel's wonderful decision to bundle IBT and SHSTK under CET,
track the "second" feature to avoid false failures when running on a CPU
with only one of IBT or SHSTK.

Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/msrs_test.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/msrs_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/msrs_test.c
index 6a956cfe0c65..442409e40da0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/msrs_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/msrs_test.c
@@ -392,12 +392,32 @@ static void test_msrs(void)
 	}
 
 	for (idx = 0; idx < ARRAY_SIZE(__msrs); idx++) {
-		if (msrs[idx].is_kvm_defined) {
+		struct kvm_msr *msr = &msrs[idx];
+
+		if (msr->is_kvm_defined) {
 			for (i = 0; i < NR_VCPUS; i++)
 				host_test_kvm_reg(vcpus[i]);
 			continue;
 		}
 
+		/*
+		 * Verify KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID and KVM_GET_MSR_INDEX_LIST
+		 * are consistent with respect to MSRs whose existence is
+		 * enumerated via CPUID.  Note, using LM as a dummy feature
+		 * is a-ok here as well, as all MSRs that abuse LM should be
+		 * unconditionally reported in the save/restore list (and
+		 * selftests are 64-bit only).  Note #2, skip the check for
+		 * FS/GS.base MSRs, as they aren't reported in the save/restore
+		 * list since their state is managed via SREGS.
+		 */
+		TEST_ASSERT(msr->index == MSR_FS_BASE || msr->index == MSR_GS_BASE ||
+			    kvm_msr_is_in_save_restore_list(msr->index) ==
+			    (kvm_cpu_has(msr->feature) || kvm_cpu_has(msr->feature2)),
+			    "%s %s save/restore list, but %s according to CPUID", msr->name,
+			    kvm_msr_is_in_save_restore_list(msr->index) ? "is" : "isn't",
+			    (kvm_cpu_has(msr->feature) || kvm_cpu_has(msr->feature2)) ?
+			    "supported" : "unsupported");
+
 		sync_global_to_guest(vm, idx);
 
 		vcpus_run(vcpus, NR_VCPUS);
-- 
2.51.0.384.g4c02a37b29-goog