From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: SVM: Filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers on bare metal
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 00:32:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60f7c9b3-312f-41e2-ab47-c4361df1d825@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251113225621.1688428-7-seanjc@google.com>
On 11/13/25 23:56, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Explicitly filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers, as
> svm_exit_handlers[] will never be sized with entries that use bits 63:32.
>
> Processing the non-failing exit code as a 32-bit value will allow tracking
> exit_code as a single 64-bit value (which it is, architecturally). This
> will also allow hardening KVM against Spectre-like attacks without needing
> to do silly things to avoid build failures on 32-bit kernels
> (array_index_nospec() rightly asserts that the index fits in an "unsigned
> long").
>
> Omit the check when running as a VM, as KVM has historically failed to set
> bits 63:32 appropriately when synthesizing VM-Exits, i.e. KVM could get
> false positives when running as a VM on an older, broken KVM/kernel. From
> a functional perspective, omitting the check is "fine", as any unwanted
> collision between e.g. VMEXIT_INVALID and a 32-bit exit code will be
> fatal to KVM-on-KVM regardless of what KVM-as-L1 does.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> index 202a4d8088a2..3b05476296d0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> @@ -3433,8 +3433,22 @@ static void dump_vmcb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> sev_free_decrypted_vmsa(vcpu, save);
> }
>
> -int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 exit_code)
> +int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __exit_code)
> {
> + u32 exit_code = __exit_code;
> +
> + /*
> + * SVM uses negative values, i.e. 64-bit values, to indicate that VMRUN
> + * failed. Report all such errors to userspace (note, VMEXIT_INVALID,
> + * a.k.a. SVM_EXIT_ERR, is special cased by svm_handle_exit()). Skip
> + * the check when running as a VM, as KVM has historically left garbage
> + * in bits 63:32, i.e. running KVM-on-KVM would hit false positives if
> + * the underlying kernel is buggy.
> + */
> + if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) &&
> + (u64)exit_code != __exit_code)
> + goto unexpected_vmexit;
I reviewed the series and it looks good, but with respect to this patch
and patch 8, is it really worth it? While there is a possibility that
code 0x00000000ffffffff is used, or that any high 32-bit values other
than all-zeros or all-ones are used, they'd be presumably enabled by
some control bits in the VMCB or some paravirt thing in the hypervisor.
What really matters is that SEV-ES's kvm_get_cached_sw_exit_code() is
reading the full 64 bits and discarding invalid codes before reaching
svm_invoke_exit_handler().
I totally agree, of course, with passing __exit_code as u64 and adding a
comment explaining what's going on with "u32 exit_code == (u32)__exit_code".
Paolo
> #ifdef CONFIG_MITIGATION_RETPOLINE
> if (exit_code == SVM_EXIT_MSR)
> return msr_interception(vcpu);
> @@ -3461,7 +3475,7 @@ int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 exit_code)
>
> unexpected_vmexit:
> dump_vmcb(vcpu);
> - kvm_prepare_unexpected_reason_exit(vcpu, exit_code);
> + kvm_prepare_unexpected_reason_exit(vcpu, __exit_code);
> return 0;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-13 22:56 [PATCH 0/9] KVM: SVM: Fix (hilarious) exit_code bugs Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 1/9] KVM: nSVM: Clear exit_code_hi in VMCB when synthesizing nested VM-Exits Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:03 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 2/9] KVM: nSVM: Set exit_code_hi to -1 when synthesizing SVM_EXIT_ERR (failed VMRUN) Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:17 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 23:28 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 3/9] KVM: SVM: Add a helper to detect VMRUN failures Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:30 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 23:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 4/9] KVM: SVM: Open code handling of unexpected exits in svm_invoke_exit_handler() Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:33 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 5/9] KVM: SVM: Check for an unexpected VM-Exit after RETPOLINE "fast" handling Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:04 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 6/9] KVM: SVM: Filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers on bare metal Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:06 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-14 23:32 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2025-11-19 22:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 7/9] KVM: SVM: Treat exit_code as an unsigned 64-bit value through all of KVM Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:08 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-14 5:26 ` Michael Kelley
2025-11-14 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 18:29 ` Wei Liu
2025-11-14 18:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 18:40 ` Wei Liu
2025-11-14 15:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 15:47 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 23:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 8/9] KVM: SVM: Limit incorrect check on SVM_EXIT_ERR to running as a VM Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:11 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 9/9] KVM: SVM: Harden exit_code against being used in Spectre-like attacks Sean Christopherson
2025-12-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 0/9] KVM: SVM: Fix (hilarious) exit_code bugs 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=60f7c9b3-312f-41e2-ab47-c4361df1d825@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=decui@microsoft.com \
--cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kys@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wei.liu@kernel.org \
--cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
/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®