From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: emulate reserved nops from 0f/18 to 0f/1f
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 00:55:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200519075523.GE5189@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60c2c33c-a316-86d2-118a-96b9f4770559@redhat.com>
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 09:43:23AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 19/05/20 08:02, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 07:37:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 18/05/20 18:07, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:19:19PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>>> Instructions starting with 0f18 up to 0f1f are reserved nops, except those
> >>>> that were assigned to MPX.
> >>> Well, they're probably reserved NOPs again :-D.
> >>
> >> So are you suggesting adding them back to the list as well?
> >
> > Doesn't KVM still support MPX?
> >
> >>>> These include the endbr markers used by CET.
> >>> And RDSPP. Wouldn't it make sense to treat RDSPP as a #UD even though it's
> >>> a NOP if CET is disabled? The logic being that a sane guest will execute
> >>> RDSSP iff CET is enabled, and in that case it'd be better to inject a #UD
> >>> than to silently break the guest.
> >>
> >> We cannot assume that guests will bother checking CPUID before invoking
> >> RDSPP. This is especially true userspace, which needs to check if CET
> >> is enable for itself and can only use RDSPP to do so.
> >
> > Ugh, yeah, just read through the CET enabling thread that showed code snippets
> > that do exactly this.
> >
> > I assume it would be best to make SHSTK dependent on unrestricted guest?
> > Emulating RDSPP by reading vmcs.GUEST_SSP seems pointless as it will become
> > statle apart on the first emulated CALL/RET.
>
> Running arbitrary code under the emulator is problematic anyway with
> CET, since you won't be checking ENDBR markers or updating the state
> machine. So perhaps in addition to what you say we should have a mode
> where, unless unrestricted guest is disabled, the emulator only accepts
> I/O, MOV and ALU instructions.
Doh, I forgot all about those pesky ENDBR markers. I think a slimmed down
emulator makes sense?
Tangentially related, isn't the whole fastop thing doomed once CET kernel
support lands?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-19 7:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-15 16:19 [PATCH] KVM: x86: emulate reserved nops from 0f/18 to 0f/1f Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-18 16:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-05-18 17:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-19 6:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-05-19 7:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-19 7:55 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2020-05-19 8:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-19 15:32 ` 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=20200519075523.GE5189@linux.intel.com \
--to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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).