From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction"
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 23:29:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180329212932.GA27107@flask> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1522198134-2709-3-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
2018-03-27 17:48-0700, Wanpeng Li:
> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
>
> There is no easy way to force KVM to run an instruction through the emulator
> (by design as that will expose the x86 emulator as a significant attack-surface).
> However, we do wish to expose the x86 emulator in case we are testing it
> (e.g. via kvm-unit-tests). Therefore, this patch adds a "force emulation prefix"
> that is designed to raise #UD which KVM will trap and it's #UD exit-handler will
> match "force emulation prefix" to run instruction after prefix by the x86 emulator.
> To not expose the x86 emulator by default, we add a module parameter that should
> be off by default.
>
> A simple testcase here:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> #define HYPERVISOR_INFO 0x40000000
>
> #define CPUID(idx, eax, ebx, ecx, edx) \
> asm volatile (\
> "ud2a; .ascii \"kvm\"; cpuid" \
> :"=b" (*ebx), "=a" (*eax), "=c" (*ecx), "=d" (*edx) \
> :"0"(idx) );
>
> void main()
> {
> unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> char string[13];
>
> CPUID(HYPERVISOR_INFO, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 0) = ebx;
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 4) = ecx;
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 8) = edx;
>
> string[12] = 0;
> if (strncmp(string, "KVMKVMKVM\0\0\0", 12) == 0)
> printf("kvm guest\n");
> else
> printf("bare hardware\n");
> }
>
> Suggested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> Cc: Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -146,6 +146,9 @@ bool __read_mostly enable_vmware_backdoor = false;
> module_param(enable_vmware_backdoor, bool, S_IRUGO);
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(enable_vmware_backdoor);
>
> +static bool __read_mostly force_emulation_prefix = false;
> +module_param(force_emulation_prefix, bool, S_IRUGO);
> +
> #define KVM_NR_SHARED_MSRS 16
>
> struct kvm_shared_msrs_global {
> @@ -4843,8 +4846,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_write_guest_virt_system);
> int handle_ud(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> enum emulation_result er;
> + int emulation_type = EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD;
> +
> + if (force_emulation_prefix) {
> + char sig[5]; /* ud2; .ascii "kvm" */
> + struct x86_exception e;
> +
> + kvm_read_guest_virt(&vcpu->arch.emulate_ctxt,
> + kvm_get_linear_rip(vcpu), sig, sizeof(sig), &e);
> + if (memcmp(sig, "\xf\xbkvm", sizeof(sig)) == 0) {
> + emulation_type = 0;
> + kvm_rip_write(vcpu, kvm_rip_read(vcpu) + sizeof(sig));
> + }
> + }
>
> - er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD);
> + er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, emulation_type);
> if (er == EMULATE_USER_EXIT)
> return 0;
> if (er != EMULATE_DONE)
The code afterwards is going to inject an #UD if the emulation failed.
I think that preserving the cpu state and forwarding the emulation
failure to userspace would be more useful. The change would probably be
best as:
if (memcmp(sig, "\xf\xbkvm", sizeof(sig)) == 0) {
kvm_rip_write(vcpu, kvm_rip_read(vcpu) + sizeof(sig));
return emulate_instruction(vcpu, 0) == EMULATE_DONE;
}
Looks great otherwise, thanks.
(We want to use this in emulate.c kvm-unit-test that currently fails
because of a hack that doesn't work anymore.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-29 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-28 0:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction" Wanpeng Li
2018-03-28 0:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] KVM: X86: Introduce handle_ud() Wanpeng Li
2018-03-28 0:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction" Wanpeng Li
2018-03-29 21:29 ` Radim Krčmář [this message]
2018-04-01 11:12 ` Wanpeng Li
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-03-28 6:55 Liran Alon
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=20180329212932.GA27107@flask \
--to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liran.alon@oracle.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.