From: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
To: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] nSVM: use svm->nested.save to load vmcb12 registers and avoid TOC/TOU races
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 11:24:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee207b0c-eab3-13ba-44be-999f849008d2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b1e17416cef1e37f42e9bc8b2283b03d2651cb2.camel@redhat.com>
On 14/09/2021 11:12, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-09-14 at 12:02 +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>> On Tue, 2021-09-14 at 10:20 +0200, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>>> On 12/09/2021 12:42, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (!nested_vmcb_valid_sregs(vcpu, &vmcb12->save) ||
>>>>> + if (!nested_vmcb_valid_sregs(vcpu, &svm->nested.save) ||
>>>>> !nested_vmcb_check_controls(vcpu, &svm->nested.ctl)) {
>>>> If you use a different struct for the copied fields, then it makes
>>>> sense IMHO to drop the 'control' parameter from nested_vmcb_check_controls,
>>>> and just use the svm->nested.save there directly.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, what you say in patch 2 makes sense to me. I can create a new struct
>>> vmcb_save_area_cached, but I need to keep nested.ctl because 1) it is
>>> used also elsewhere, and different fields from the one checked here are
>>> read/set and 2) using another structure (or the same
>>
>> Yes, keep nested.ctl, since vast majority of the fields are copied I think.
>
> But actually that you mention it, I'll say why not to create vmcb_control_area_cached
> as well indeed and change the type of svm->nested.save to it. (in a separate patch)
>
> I see what you mean that we modify it a bit (but we shoudn't to be honest) and such, but
> all of this can be fixed.
So basically you are proposing:
struct svm_nested_state {
...
struct vmcb_control_area ctl; // we need this because it is used
everywhere, I think
struct vmcb_control_area_cached ctl_cached;
struct vmcb_save_area_cached save_cached;
...
}
and then
if (!nested_vmcb_valid_sregs(vcpu, &svm->nested.save_cached) ||
!nested_vmcb_check_controls(vcpu, &svm->nested.ctl_cached)) {
like that?
Or do you want to delete nested.ctl completely and just keep the fields
actually used in ctl_cached?
Also, note that as I am trying to use vmcb_save_area_cached, it is worth
noticing that nested_vmcb_valid_sregs() is also used in
svm_set_nested_state(), so it requires some additional little changes.
Thank you,
Emanuele
>
> The advantage of having vmcb_control_area_cached is that it becomes impossible to use
> by mistake a non copied field from the guest.
>
> It would also emphasize that this stuff came from the guest and should be treated as
> a toxic waste.
>
> Note again that this should be done if we agree as a separate patch.
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Maxim Levitsky
>>
>>
>>> vmcb_save_area_cached) in its place would just duplicate the same fields
>>> of nested.ctl, creating even more confusion and possible inconsistency.
>>>
>>> Let me know if you disagree.
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Emanuele
>>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-14 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-03 10:20 [RFC PATCH 0/3] KVM: nSVM: avoid TOC/TOU race when checking vmcb12 Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-03 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] KVM: nSVM: move nested_vmcb_check_cr3_cr4 logic in nested_vmcb_valid_sregs Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-12 10:36 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-03 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] nSVM: introduce smv->nested.save to cache save area fields Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-12 10:39 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-28 16:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-09-28 22:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-09-29 11:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-09-03 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] nSVM: use svm->nested.save to load vmcb12 registers and avoid TOC/TOU races Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-12 10:42 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-14 8:20 ` Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-14 9:02 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-14 9:12 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-14 9:24 ` Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito [this message]
2021-09-14 9:34 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-14 10:52 ` Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
2021-09-14 11:39 ` Maxim Levitsky
2021-09-28 16:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=ee207b0c-eab3-13ba-44be-999f849008d2@redhat.com \
--to=eesposit@redhat.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=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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).