From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Cc: Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@intel.com>, Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com,
jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: VMX: Enable Notify VM exit
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 17:55:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTucCk8cVVvES2mx@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce2dfc44-d1cf-8d09-6a38-9befb6f65885@intel.com>
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 2:47 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2021, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> > > On 9/3/2021 12:29 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > > After syncing internally, we know that the internal threshold is not
> > > > > architectural but a model-specific value. It will be published in some place
> > > > > in future.
> > > >
> > > > Any chance it will also be discoverable, e.g. via an MSR?
> > >
> > > I also hope we can expose it via MSR. If not, we can maintain a table per
> > > FMS in KVM to get the internal threshold. However, per FMS info is not
> > > friendly to be virtualized (when we are going to enable the nested support).
> >
> > Yeah, FMS is awful. If the built-in buffer isn't discoverable, my vote is to
> > assume the worst, i.e. a built-in buffer of '0', and have the notify_window
> > param default to a safe value, e.g. 25k or maybe even 150k (to go above what the
> > hardware folks apparently deemed safe for SPR). It's obviously not idea, but
> > it's better than playing FMS guessing games.
> >
> > > I'll try to persuade internal to expose it via MSR, but I guarantee nothing.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > On a related topic, this needs tests. One thought would be to stop unconditionally
> > > > intercepting #AC if NOTIFY_WINDOW is enabled, and then have the test set up the
> > > > infinite #AC vectoring scenario.
> > > >
> > >
> > > yes, we have already tested with this case with notify_window set to 0. No
> > > false positive.
> >
> > Can you send a selftest or kvm-unit-test?
> >
>
> Actually we implement the attacking case of CVE-2015-5307 with
> kvm-unit-test, while manually disabling the intercept of #AC.
>
> First, it requires modification of KVM that only posting the kvm-unit-test
> doesn't help.
It helps in that hacking KVM to disable #AC interception is a lot easier than
re-writing a test from scratch.
> Second, release the attacking case is not the correct action.
As in it's irresponsible to provide code that can be used to DoS a hypervisor?
The CVE is six years old, IMO security-through-obscurity is unnecessary at this
point.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-10 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-25 5:12 [PATCH v2] KVM: VMX: Enable Notify VM exit Tao Xu
2021-06-02 10:31 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-06-03 1:23 ` Tao Xu
2021-06-03 13:43 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-06-03 1:25 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-06-03 13:35 ` Jim Mattson
2021-06-07 9:24 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-06-03 13:52 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-06-07 9:23 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-06-24 4:52 ` Tao Xu
2021-07-22 3:25 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-07-30 20:41 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-02 12:53 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-08-02 15:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-03 0:38 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-09-02 9:28 ` Chenyi Qiang
2021-09-02 16:29 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-07 13:33 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-09-09 18:47 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-10 7:39 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-09-10 17:55 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2021-09-02 16:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-02 16:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-07 13:45 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-09-09 18:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-13 2:58 ` Xiaoyao Li
2021-10-15 18:29 ` Sean Christopherson
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=YTucCk8cVVvES2mx@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chenyi.qiang@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tao3.xu@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.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).