From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Venkatesh Srinivas <venkateshs@chromium.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: x86: AMD's IBPB is not equivalent to Intel's IBPB
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 11:25:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240816182533.2478415-2-jmattson@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240816182533.2478415-1-jmattson@google.com>
From Intel's documention [1], "CPUID.(EAX=07H,ECX=0):EDX[26]
enumerates support for indirect branch restricted speculation (IBRS)
and the indirect branch predictor barrier (IBPB)." Further, from [2],
"Software that executed before the IBPB command cannot control the
predicted targets of indirect branches (4) executed after the command
on the same logical processor," where footnote 4 reads, "Note that
indirect branches include near call indirect, near jump indirect and
near return instructions. Because it includes near returns, it follows
that **RSB entries created before an IBPB command cannot control the
predicted targets of returns executed after the command on the same
logical processor.**" [emphasis mine]
On the other hand, AMD's IBPB "may not prevent return branch
predictions from being specified by pre-IBPB branch targets" [3].
However, some AMD processors have an "enhanced IBPB" [terminology
mine] which does clear the return address predictor. This feature is
enumerated by CPUID.80000008:EDX.IBPB_RET[bit 30] [4].
Adjust the cross-vendor features enumerated by KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
accordingly.
[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/technical-documentation/cpuid-enumeration-and-architectural-msrs.html
[2] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/technical-documentation/speculative-execution-side-channel-mitigations.html#Footnotes
[3] https://www.amd.com/en/resources/product-security/bulletin/amd-sb-1040.html
[4] https://www.amd.com/content/dam/amd/en/documents/processor-tech-docs/programmer-references/24594.pdf
Fixes: 0c54914d0c52 ("KVM: x86: use Intel speculation bugs and features as derived in generic x86 code")
Suggested-by: Venkatesh Srinivas <venkateshs@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
---
v2: Use IBPB_RET to identify semantic equality (Venkatesh)
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
index 2617be544480..044bdc9e938b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
@@ -690,7 +690,9 @@ void kvm_set_cpu_caps(void)
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_TSC_ADJUST);
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_ARCH_CAPABILITIES);
- if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB) && boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBRS))
+ if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB_RET) &&
+ boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB) &&
+ boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBRS))
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL);
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_STIBP))
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_INTEL_STIBP);
@@ -759,8 +761,10 @@ void kvm_set_cpu_caps(void)
* arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c is kind enough to
* record that in cpufeatures so use them.
*/
- if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB))
+ if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB)) {
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB);
+ kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB_RET);
+ }
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBRS))
kvm_cpu_cap_set(X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBRS);
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_STIBP))
--
2.46.0.184.g6999bdac58-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-16 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-16 18:25 [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpufeatures: Define X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB_RET Jim Mattson
2024-08-16 18:25 ` Jim Mattson [this message]
2024-08-22 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: x86: AMD's IBPB is not equivalent to Intel's IBPB Sean Christopherson
2024-08-23 16:47 ` Venkatesh Srinivas
2024-08-23 16:06 ` Tom Lendacky
2024-08-23 17:33 ` Jim Mattson
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=20240816182533.2478415-2-jmattson@google.com \
--to=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkateshs@chromium.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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