From: "Moger, Babu" <Babu.Moger@amd.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc: "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>, "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"sean.j.christopherson@intel.com"
<sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
"vkuznets@redhat.com" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
"wanpengli@tencent.com" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
"zohar@linux.ibm.com" <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
"yamada.masahiro@socionext.com" <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
"nayna@linux.ibm.com" <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] kvm: svm: Enable UMIP feature on AMD
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 19:20:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <669031a1-b9a6-8a45-9a05-a6ce5fb7fa8b@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALMp9eQT=a99YhraQZ+awMKOWK=3tg=m9NppZnsvK0Q1PWxbAw@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/1/19 1:29 PM, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 10:33 AM Moger, Babu <Babu.Moger@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>> AMD 2nd generation EPYC processors support UMIP (User-Mode Instruction
>> Prevention) feature. The UMIP feature prevents the execution of certain
>> instructions if the Current Privilege Level (CPL) is greater than 0.
>> If any of these instructions are executed with CPL > 0 and UMIP
>> is enabled, then kernel reports a #GP exception.
>>
>> The idea is taken from articles:
>> https://lwn.net/Articles/738209/
>> https://lwn.net/Articles/694385/
>>
>> Enable the feature if supported on bare metal and emulate instructions
>> to return dummy values for certain cases.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> index 4153ca8cddb7..79abbdeca148 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> @@ -2533,6 +2533,11 @@ static void svm_decache_cr4_guest_bits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> }
>>
>> +static bool svm_umip_emulated(void)
>> +{
>> + return boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_UMIP);
>> +}
>
> This makes no sense to me. If the hardware actually supports UMIP,
> then it doesn't have to be emulated.
My understanding..
If the hardware supports the UMIP, it will generate the #GP fault when
these instructions are executed at CPL > 0. Purpose of the emulation is to
trap the GP and return a dummy value. Seems like this required in certain
legacy OSes running in protected and virtual-8086 modes. In long mode no
need to emulate. Here is the bit explanation https://lwn.net/Articles/738209/
If we don't care about those legacy cases we don't need to emulate.
>
> To the extent that kvm emulates UMIP on Intel CPUs without hardware
> UMIP (i.e. smsw is still allowed at CPL>0), we can always do the same
> emulation on AMD, because SVM has always offered intercepts of sgdt,
> sidt, sldt, and str. So, if you really want to offer this emulation on
> pre-EPYC 2 CPUs, this function should just return true. But, I have to
> ask, "why?"
Trying to support UMIP feature only on EPYC 2 hardware. No intention to
support pre-EPYC 2.
>
> *Virtualization* of UMIP on EPYC 2 already works without any of these changes.
>
>> static void update_cr0_intercept(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> {
>> ulong gcr0 = svm->vcpu.arch.cr0;
>> @@ -4438,6 +4443,13 @@ static int interrupt_window_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> +static int umip_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> +{
>> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = &svm->vcpu;
>> +
>> + return kvm_emulate_instruction(vcpu, 0);
>> +}
>> +
>> static int pause_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>> {
>> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = &svm->vcpu;
>> @@ -4775,6 +4787,10 @@ static int (*const svm_exit_handlers[])(struct vcpu_svm *svm) = {
>> [SVM_EXIT_SMI] = nop_on_interception,
>> [SVM_EXIT_INIT] = nop_on_interception,
>> [SVM_EXIT_VINTR] = interrupt_window_interception,
>> + [SVM_EXIT_IDTR_READ] = umip_interception,
>> + [SVM_EXIT_GDTR_READ] = umip_interception,
>> + [SVM_EXIT_LDTR_READ] = umip_interception,
>> + [SVM_EXIT_TR_READ] = umip_interception,
>> [SVM_EXIT_RDPMC] = rdpmc_interception,
>> [SVM_EXIT_CPUID] = cpuid_interception,
>> [SVM_EXIT_IRET] = iret_interception,
>> @@ -5976,11 +5992,6 @@ static bool svm_xsaves_supported(void)
>> return boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVES);
>> }
>>
>> -static bool svm_umip_emulated(void)
>> -{
>> - return false;
>> -}
>> -
>> static bool svm_pt_supported(void)
>> {
>> return false;
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-01 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-01 17:33 [PATCH 0/4] Emulate and enable UMIP feature on AMD Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 17:33 ` [PATCH 1/4] kvm: x86: Dont set UMIP feature bit unconditionally Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 18:35 ` Jim Mattson
2019-11-01 19:39 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 19:42 ` Jim Mattson
2019-11-01 17:33 ` [PATCH 2/4] kvm: svm: Enable UMIP feature on AMD Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 18:24 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-01 18:38 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 19:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-01 18:29 ` Jim Mattson
2019-11-01 19:20 ` Moger, Babu [this message]
2019-11-01 19:24 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-01 20:04 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 20:08 ` Jim Mattson
2019-11-02 19:23 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-03 11:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-11-04 18:46 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-04 11:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-04 18:45 ` Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 17:33 ` [PATCH 3/4] kvm: svm: Emulate UMIP instructions on non SEV guest Moger, Babu
2019-11-01 17:34 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/Kconfig: Rename UMIP config parameter Moger, Babu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=669031a1-b9a6-8a45-9a05-a6ce5fb7fa8b@amd.com \
--to=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).