linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] KVM: x86: Add x2APIC "features" to control EOI broadcast suppression

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c7eab673dd567936761a8cc6e091a432b38d08da.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 19:48:43 -0800
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
 <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: "shaju.abraham@...anix.com" <shaju.abraham@...anix.com>, 
 "khushit.shah@...anix.com" <khushit.shah@...anix.com>, "x86@...nel.org"
 <x86@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "stable@...r.kernel.org"
 <stable@...r.kernel.org>,  "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
 "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com"
 <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,  "pbonzini@...hat.com"
 <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Kohler, Jon" <jon@...anix.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] KVM: x86: Add x2APIC "features" to control EOI
 broadcast suppression

On Wed, 2026-01-28 at 02:22 +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
>  
> > Ah, so userspace which checks all the kernel's capabilities *first*
> > will not see KVM_X2APIC_ENABLE_SUPPRESS_EOI_BROADCAST advertised,
> > because it needs to enable KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP first?
> > 
> > I guess that's tolerable¹ but the documentation could make it clearer,
> > perhaps? I can see VMMs silently failing to detect the feature because
> > they just don't set split-irqchip before checking for it? 
> > 
> > 
> > ¹ although I still kind of hate it and would have preferred to have the
> >    I/O APIC patch; userspace still has to intentionally *enable* that
> >    combination. But OK, I've reluctantly conceded that.
> 
> To make it even more robust, perhaps we can grab kvm->lock mutex in
> kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap() for KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API, so that it won't race with
> KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP (which already grabs kvm->lock) and
> KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP?
> 
> Even more, we can add additional check in KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP to return -
> EINVAL when it sees kvm->arch.suppress_eoi_broadcast_mode is
> KVM_X2APIC_ENABLE_SUPPRESS_EOI_BROADCAST?

If we do that, then the query for KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API could advertise
the KVM_X2APIC_ENABLE_SUPPRESS_EOI_BROADCAST for a freshly created KVM,
even before userspace has enabled *either* KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP nor
KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP?

That would be slightly better than the existing proposed awfulness
where the kernel doesn't *admit* to having the _ENABLE_ capability
until userspace first enables the KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP.


Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5069 bytes)