xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Donald D Dugger <donald.d.dugger@intel.com>,
	Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>,
	Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
	Sherry Hurwitz <sherry.hurwitz@amd.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] x86/fpu: improve check for XSAVE* not writing FIP/FDP fields
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:59:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56CC81CC02000078000D5431@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1456225539-9162-2-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>

>>> On 23.02.16 at 12:05, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c
> @@ -263,41 +263,24 @@ void xsave(struct vcpu *v, uint64_t mask)
>  
>      if ( word_size <= 0 || !is_pv_32bit_vcpu(v) )
>      {
> -        typeof(ptr->fpu_sse.fip.sel) fcs = ptr->fpu_sse.fip.sel;
> -        typeof(ptr->fpu_sse.fdp.sel) fds = ptr->fpu_sse.fdp.sel;
> +        uint64_t bad_fip;
>  
> -        if ( cpu_has_xsaveopt || cpu_has_xsaves )
> -        {
> -            /*
> -             * XSAVEOPT/XSAVES may not write the FPU portion even when the
> -             * respective mask bit is set. For the check further down to work
> -             * we hence need to put the save image back into the state that
> -             * it was in right after the previous XSAVEOPT.
> -             */
> -            if ( word_size > 0 &&
> -                 (ptr->fpu_sse.x[FPU_WORD_SIZE_OFFSET] == 4 ||
> -                  ptr->fpu_sse.x[FPU_WORD_SIZE_OFFSET] == 2) )
> -            {
> -                ptr->fpu_sse.fip.sel = 0;
> -                ptr->fpu_sse.fdp.sel = 0;
> -            }
> -        }
> +        /*
> +         * FIP/FDP may not be written in some cases (e.g., if
> +         * XSAVEOPT/XSAVES is used, or on AMD CPUs if an exception
> +         * isn't pending).
> +         *
> +         * To tell if the hardware writes these fields, make the FIP
> +         * field non-canonical by flipping the top bit.
> +         */
> +        bad_fip = ptr->fpu_sse.fip.addr ^= 1ull << 63;
>  
>          XSAVE("0x48,");
>  
> -        if ( !(mask & ptr->xsave_hdr.xstate_bv & XSTATE_FP) ||
> -             /*
> -              * AMD CPUs don't save/restore FDP/FIP/FOP unless an exception
> -              * is pending.
> -              */
> -             (!(ptr->fpu_sse.fsw & 0x0080) &&
> -              boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD) )
> +        /* FIP/FDP not updated? Restore the old FIP value. */
> +        if ( ptr->fpu_sse.fip.addr == bad_fip )
>          {
> -            if ( (cpu_has_xsaveopt || cpu_has_xsaves) && word_size > 0 )
> -            {
> -                ptr->fpu_sse.fip.sel = fcs;
> -                ptr->fpu_sse.fdp.sel = fds;
> -            }
> +            ptr->fpu_sse.fip.addr ^= 1ull << 63;
>              return;
>          }

While indeed this is a lot more simple, it puts us on thin ice,
utilizing undocumented behavior: You make us depend on FIP
actually being a 48-bit register which gets sign-extended to 64
bits upon saving, and truncated during restore. While all CPUs
I've tested so far match this requirement, Intel ones (other
than AMD's) do not match this in behavior for FDP. Since this
already makes clear that AMD's are buggy (losing relevant
state, since FPU operations using FS: or GS: may use non-
canonical virtual addresses, becoming canonical once
converted to linear ones) and hence need fixing, it would
remain to be seen whether they wouldn't at once extend both
FDP and FIP to 64 bits.

Furthermore neither vendor's documentation describes such
truncating behavior, i.e. purely based on that one might
assume that these fields can be used as odd storage for 64
bits of arbitrary data each.

Without a statement by both vendors that FIP is going to
retain the currently observed behavior I don't think we can
reasonably commit this change. I'm copying a number of
people from both AMD and Intel, in the hope that they may
provide clarification here.

Jan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-02-23 14:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-23 11:05 [PATCHv2 0/3] x86: workaround inability to fully restore FPU state David Vrabel
2016-02-23 11:05 ` [PATCHv2 1/3] x86/fpu: improve check for XSAVE* not writing FIP/FDP fields David Vrabel
2016-02-23 11:18   ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-23 11:54     ` David Vrabel
2016-02-23 14:07       ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 14:59   ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2016-02-23 17:42     ` David Vrabel
2016-02-24  7:51       ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-24 10:37         ` Tian, Kevin
2016-02-24 10:49           ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-18 18:23             ` Lai, Paul C
2016-02-23 11:05 ` [PATCHv2 2/3] x86/fpu: Add a per-domain field to set the width of FIP/FDP David Vrabel
2016-02-23 11:10   ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-23 11:53     ` David Vrabel
2016-02-23 15:24   ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 16:27     ` David Vrabel
2016-02-23 16:39       ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-23 11:05 ` [PATCHv2 3/3] x86/hvm: add HVM_PARAM_X87_FIP_WIDTH David Vrabel
2016-02-23 11:20   ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-24 11:51     ` Wei Liu

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=56CC81CC02000078000D5431@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com \
    --cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
    --cc=donald.d.dugger@intel.com \
    --cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=sherry.hurwitz@amd.com \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).