Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to zero

From	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to zero
Date	2017-04-26 06:50 +0200
Message-ID	<tAn3P-5Rf-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tAd4t-84X-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tAdnQ-8d5-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <tAdxw-8iW-47@gated-at.bofh.it> <tAead-kQ-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On 25/04/17 21:18, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 08:34:34PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> And what happens when there is a scheduling event right here?
>> __switch_to() will see X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS set and take a wrong
>> path.
> 
> So the whole thing we're doing right now is wrong: set bit and then
> clear bit.

Right. And this is handled by my patch.

The really clean solution would be to add this test to set_cpu_bug()
et al. Don't set/clear the bit if anyone selected to force a value.
The force variants would be capable to overwrite, the normal variants
wouldn't. This would require a lot of research to avoid pitfalls with
today's handling, though. OTOH one could remove all the calls to
apply_forced_caps().

> 
> We should not set the bit at all and there won't be any window to get it
> wrong.
> 
> So can we do something like this instead:
> 
> 	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_XENPV))
> 		set_cpu_bug(c, X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS);
> 
> or is XENPV the wrong thing to test?

This would work. OTOH I'd prefer to test whether the bit should be
forced to remain zero than use the knowledge _who_ is trying to force
it.

Juergen

Thread

[PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to zero Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-04-25 20:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-04-25 20:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-04-25 20:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-04-25 21:20 +0200
        Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if  forced to zero Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> - 2017-04-25 22:20 +0200
          Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS  if forced to zero Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-04-25 22:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-04-26 06:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-04-26 08:40 +0200
            Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-04-26 20:30 +0200
              Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-04-27 00:10 +0200
                Re: [PATCH] x86/amd: don't set X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS if forced to  zero Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-04-27 06:50 +0200

csiph-web