From: "Hou Wenlong" <houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: Honor userspace MSR filter lists for nested VM-Enter/VM-Exit
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 14:09:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240724060958.GA109293@k08j02272.eu95sqa> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zp-8o7dGivU_ek86@google.com>
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:23:37PM +0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024, Hou Wenlong wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 07:59:22AM +0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > ---
> > >
> > > I found this by inspection when backporting Hou's change to an internal kernel.
> > > I don't love piggybacking Intel's "you can't touch these special MSRs" behavior,
> > > but ignoring the userspace MSR filters is far worse IMO. E.g. if userspace is
> > > denying access to an MSR in order to reduce KVM's attack surface, letting L1
> > > sneak in reads/writes through VM-Enter/VM-Exit completely circumvents the
> > > filters.
> > >
> > > Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 ++
> > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c | 12 ++++++------
> > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 ++++--
> > > 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > index 8e5dad80b337..e6b1e42186f3 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> > > @@ -4226,9 +4226,22 @@ filtering. In that mode, ``KVM_MSR_FILTER_DEFAULT_DENY`` is invalid and causes
> > > an error.
> > >
> > > .. warning::
> > > - MSR accesses as part of nested VM-Enter/VM-Exit are not filtered.
> > > - This includes both writes to individual VMCS fields and reads/writes
> > > - through the MSR lists pointed to by the VMCS.
> > > + MSR accesses that are side effects of instruction execution (emulated or
> > > + native) are not filtered as hardware does not honor MSR bitmaps outside of
> > > + RDMSR and WRMSR, and KVM mimics that behavior when emulating instructions
> > > + to avoid pointless divergence from hardware. E.g. RDPID reads MSR_TSC_AUX,
> > > + SYSENTER reads the SYSENTER MSRs, etc.
> > > +
> > > + MSRs that are loaded/stored via dedicated VMCS fields are not filtered as
> > > + part of VM-Enter/VM-Exit emulation.
> > > +
> > > + MSRs that are loaded/store via VMX's load/store lists _are_ filtered as part
> > > + of VM-Enter/VM-Exit emulation. If an MSR access is denied on VM-Enter, KVM
> > > + synthesizes a consistency check VM-Exit(EXIT_REASON_MSR_LOAD_FAIL). If an
> > > + MSR access is denied on VM-Exit, KVM synthesizes a VM-Abort. In short, KVM
> > > + extends Intel's architectural list of MSRs that cannot be loaded/saved via
> > > + the VM-Enter/VM-Exit MSR list. It is platform owner's responsibility to
> > > + to communicate any such restrictions to their end users.
> > >
> > Do we also need to modify the statement before this warning?
>
> Yeah, that's a good idea.
>
> While you're here, did you have a use case that is/was affected by the current
> VM-Enter/VM-Exit vs. MSR filtering behavior?
>
Uh, nested virtualization is not usually used in our enviroment and I
didn't test it with MSR filtering before. I found a conflict between MSR
filtering and RDPID instruction emulation when testing the x86 emulator
for PVM, so I sent this patch. At that time, I was thinking that the
state transitions (including VM-Enter/VM-Exit) would also be affected by
MSR filtering, so I mentioned it in the commit message.
> > Since the behaviour is different from RDMSR/WRMSR emulation case.
> >
> > ```
> > if an MSR access is denied by userspace the resulting KVM behavior depends on
> > whether or not KVM_CAP_X86_USER_SPACE_MSR's KVM_MSR_EXIT_REASON_FILTER is
> > enabled. If KVM_MSR_EXIT_REASON_FILTER is enabled, KVM will exit to userspace
> > on denied accesses, i.e. userspace effectively intercepts the MSR access.
> > ```
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-24 6:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-22 23:59 Sean Christopherson
2024-07-23 13:20 ` Hou Wenlong
2024-07-23 14:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-07-24 6:09 ` Hou Wenlong [this message]
2024-08-23 23:48 ` 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=20240724060958.GA109293@k08j02272.eu95sqa \
--to=houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®