From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3737C433E6 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:33:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD60722CB8 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:33:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2405524AbhALAZm (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 19:25:42 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35192 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390879AbhAKXB7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 18:01:59 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D744C061794 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:01:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id j1so331041pld.3 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:01:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xOPKNqy/+sbhY4IEndRdEvmmTtUbPEVweZlVM1PfEvA=; b=u44tO9OPlRjZKL3SImVA+n+tnToeXY8svGWzY7PZRxycFVDlgThBGHfjLOEGNnmbKk 755WLEqRgzjpX6amRZYWGK+0KW+G2NuKzN0x+z8nwI+wJSs2sUHkOaPk+5j+S43ZbH4S jO12rEV09tg44ckeIv/BCZlhlg/41ujryuV40F5vYIciL22M6Xqq3vOYZ3SG3Pe4qUJA 3w1pFpKebNtQt3sua/ByHE6jRMybltvhJsptyZ9Ku/aRQ6aOAXxZ6E4l0XF+8FF1DT5V MlOo24QPNzNYoKaF1VVIvORd3ZYcHJ0g18wZu7S4rBZaWSIaajHeBAVGJ5MZg30ceJcG uHEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xOPKNqy/+sbhY4IEndRdEvmmTtUbPEVweZlVM1PfEvA=; b=RxFrVNr+0zXNFBkMwRphCoBNFMLjRDkW3zs9R6vOJ8Nq5K9GGVqmE+vh3cTYDDG9F7 JhYsGZNCQMihgt4zzs4GDKl8TsPupre2Je0naX0Ehky6Qk8nsZYc2Z0kU2pKywfyyHjk sv3V+VGOvxV6EipvK07/OTLCXBUNEw6IgP80AntAE69YmbUB3KH+hKsDRiz6OO5XOW+k RF4TfHjKZng/uZ0AKNZuPm9QcKOPteucrqz5KX8g3rfrwFseOlmKhj38g43Cyk3oWhFA haLiZVhiYZyyJl++jeGv3Xys6bqVn6IPf2qyQ4O+ab4Z1q1CTfHZeeBqgvbgHO94pRW3 YXzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5301aAVLWdwJYCT8hz0Sdn69jh08TxKkg+WNyJRVo2tceNzG3+KE ROqK/aeTjdooEYOWOPvbRfZDKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydGNoJGAYJDTyPYiciKOeziGNqWQ8xAXi3qDj10yzGvHULOj/oIrYKIDIkcVFI4Ri7PR5gYQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:e96:: with SMTP id fv22mr1198135pjb.92.1610406074679; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:01:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:f:10:1ea0:b8ff:fe73:50f5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a29sm689291pfr.73.2021.01.11.15.01.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:01:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:01:06 -0800 From: Sean Christopherson To: Jim Mattson Cc: syzbot , Borislav Petkov , "H . Peter Anvin" , Joerg Roedel , kvm list , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Paolo Bonzini , syzkaller-bugs , Thomas Gleixner , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in kvm_vcpu_after_set_cpuid Message-ID: References: <000000000000d5173d05b7097755@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, Jim Mattson wrote: > It looks like userspace can possibly induce this by providing guest > CPUID information with a "physical address width" of 64 in leaf > 0x80000008. It was actually the opposite, where userspace provides '0' and caused '63 - 0 + 1' to overflow. KVM controls the upper bound, and rsvd_bits() explicitly handles 'end < start', so an absurdly large maxpa is handled correctly. Aleady fixed by Paolo in commit 2f80d502d627 ("KVM: x86: fix shift out of bounds reported by UBSAN"). > Perhaps cpuid_query_maxphyaddr() should just look at the low 5 bits of > CPUID.80000008H:EAX? Better would be to return an error for > out-of-range values, but I understand that the kvm community's stance > is that, in general, guest CPUID information should not be validated > by kvm. And rob Paolo of his crazy^Wbrilliant bit math shenanigans? :-D