From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, HK_RANDOM_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C085C48BD7 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65970208CB for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726940AbfF0M13 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 08:27:29 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:46490 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726059AbfF0M12 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 08:27:28 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jun 2019 05:27:27 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,423,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="164321091" Received: from lxy-dell.sh.intel.com ([10.239.159.145]) by fmsmga007.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jun 2019 05:27:24 -0700 Message-ID: <3c53ec41a1cdf668f3d849c2177fff3098347fbb.camel@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 11/17] kvm/vmx: Emulate MSR TEST_CTL From: Xiaoyao Li To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Fenghua Yu , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , H Peter Anvin , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Dave Hansen , Paolo Bonzini , Radim Krcmar , Christopherson Sean J , Ashok Raj , Tony Luck , Dan Williams , Sai Praneeth Prakhya , Ravi V Shankar , linux-kernel , x86 , kvm@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:22:28 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: <1560897679-228028-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1560897679-228028-12-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-2.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 14:11 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > > On 6/27/2019 3:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > The real interesting question is whether the #AC on split lock prevents > > > the > > > actual bus lock or not. If it does then the above is fine. > > > > > > If not, then it would be trivial for a malicious guest to set the > > > SPLIT_LOCK_ENABLE bit and "handle" the exception pro forma, return to the > > > offending instruction and trigger another one. It lowers the rate, but > > > that > > > doesn't make it any better. > > > > > > The SDM is as usual too vague to be useful. Please clarify. > > > > > > > This feature is to ensure no bus lock (due to split lock) in hardware, that > > to > > say, when bit 29 of TEST_CTL is set, there is no bus lock due to split lock > > can be acquired. > > So enabling this prevents the bus lock, i.e. the exception is raised before > that happens. > exactly. > Please add that information to the changelog as well because that's > important to know and makes me much more comfortable handing the #AC back > into the guest when it has it enabled. > Will add it in next version. Thanks.