From: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
<tglx@linutronix.de>, <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
<seanjc@google.com>, <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: <peterz@infradead.org>, <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
<weijiang.yang@intel.com>, <john.allen@amd.com>, <bp@alien8.de>,
<xin3.li@intel.com>, Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Mitchell Levy <levymitchell0@gmail.com>,
"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
Li RongQing <lirongqing@baidu.com>,
Adamos Ttofari <attofari@amazon.de>,
Vignesh Balasubramanian <vigbalas@amd.com>,
Aruna Ramakrishna <aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Always preserve non-user xfeatures/flags in __state_perm
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 10:17:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <37b9903a-e8fc-4d57-a1ae-2bd2f26a9974@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250318153316.1970147-2-chao.gao@intel.com>
On 3/18/2025 8:31 AM, Chao Gao wrote:
>
> When granting userspace or a KVM guest access to an xfeature, preserve the
> entity's existing supervisor and software-defined permissions as tracked
> by __state_perm, i.e. use __state_perm to track *all* permissions even
> though all supported supervisor xfeatures are granted to all FPUs and
> FPU_GUEST_PERM_LOCKED disallows changing permissions.
>
> Effectively clobbering supervisor permissions results in inconsistent
> behavior, as xstate_get_group_perm() will report supervisor features for
> process that do NOT request access to dynamic user xfeatures, whereas any
> and all supervisor features will be absent from the set of permissions for
> any process that is granted access to one or more dynamic xfeatures (which
> right now means AMX).
>
> The inconsistency isn't problematic because fpu_xstate_prctl() already
> strips out everything except user xfeatures:
>
> case ARCH_GET_XCOMP_PERM:
> /*
> * Lockless snapshot as it can also change right after the
> * dropping the lock.
> */
> permitted = xstate_get_host_group_perm();
> permitted &= XFEATURE_MASK_USER_SUPPORTED;
> return put_user(permitted, uptr);
>
> case ARCH_GET_XCOMP_GUEST_PERM:
> permitted = xstate_get_guest_group_perm();
> permitted &= XFEATURE_MASK_USER_SUPPORTED;
> return put_user(permitted, uptr);
>
> and similarly KVM doesn't apply the __state_perm to supervisor states
> (kvm_get_filtered_xcr0() incorporates xstate_get_guest_group_perm()):
>
> case 0xd: {
> u64 permitted_xcr0 = kvm_get_filtered_xcr0();
> u64 permitted_xss = kvm_caps.supported_xss;
>
> But if KVM in particular were to ever change, dropping supervisor
> permissions would result in subtle bugs in KVM's reporting of supported
> CPUID settings. And the above behavior also means that having supervisor
> xfeatures in __state_perm is correctly handled by all users.
>
> Dropping supervisor permissions also creates another landmine for KVM. If
> more dynamic user xfeatures are ever added, requesting access to multiple
> xfeatures in separate ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_GUEST_PERM calls will result in the
> second invocation of __xstate_request_perm() computing the wrong ksize, as
> as the mask passed to xstate_calculate_size() would not contain *any*
> supervisor features.
>
> Commit 781c64bfcb73 ("x86/fpu/xstate: Handle supervisor states in XSTATE
> permissions") fudged around the size issue for userspace FPUs, but for
> reasons unknown skipped guest FPUs. Lack of a fix for KVM "works" only
> because KVM doesn't yet support virtualizing features that have supervisor
> xfeatures, i.e. as of today, KVM guest FPUs will never need the relevant
> xfeatures.
>
> Simply extending the hack-a-fix for guests would temporarily solve the
> ksize issue, but wouldn't address the inconsistency issue and would leave
> another lurking pitfall for KVM. KVM support for virtualizing CET will
> likely add CET_KERNEL as a guest-only xfeature, i.e. CET_KERNEL will not
> be set in xfeatures_mask_supervisor() and would again be dropped when
> granting access to dynamic xfeatures.
>
> Note, the existing clobbering behavior is rather subtle. The @permitted
> parameter to __xstate_request_perm() comes from:
>
> permitted = xstate_get_group_perm(guest);
>
> which is either fpu->guest_perm.__state_perm or fpu->perm.__state_perm,
> where __state_perm is initialized to:
>
> fpu->perm.__state_perm = fpu_kernel_cfg.default_features;
>
> and copied to the guest side of things:
>
> /* Same defaults for guests */
> fpu->guest_perm = fpu->perm;
>
> fpu_kernel_cfg.default_features contains everything except the dynamic
> xfeatures, i.e. everything except XFEATURE_MASK_XTILE_DATA:
>
> fpu_kernel_cfg.default_features = fpu_kernel_cfg.max_features;
> fpu_kernel_cfg.default_features &= ~XFEATURE_MASK_USER_DYNAMIC;
>
> When __xstate_request_perm() restricts the local "mask" variable to
> compute the user state size:
>
> mask &= XFEATURE_MASK_USER_SUPPORTED;
> usize = xstate_calculate_size(mask, false);
>
> it subtly overwrites the target __state_perm with "mask" containing only
> user xfeatures:
>
> perm = guest ? &fpu->guest_perm : &fpu->perm;
> /* Pairs with the READ_ONCE() in xstate_get_group_perm() */
> WRITE_ONCE(perm->__state_perm, mask);
This changelog appears to be largely derived from Sean’s previous email.
I think it can be significantly shortened to focus on the key
points, such as:
x86/fpu/xstate: Preserve non-user bits in permission handling
When granting userspace or a KVM guest access to an xfeature, the task
leader’s perm->__state_perm (host or guest) is overwritten,
unintentionally discarding non-user bits. Additionally, supervisor state
permissions are always granted.
The current behavior presents the following issues:
* Inconsistencies in permission handling – Supervisor permissions are
universally granted, and the FPU_GUEST_PERM_LOCKED bit is explicitly
set to prevent permission changes.
* Redundant permission setting – Since supervisor state permissions
are always granted, the permitted mask already includes them, making
it unnecessary to set them again.
Ensure that __xstate_request_perm() does not inadvertently drop
supervisor and software-defined permissions. Also, avoid redundantly
granting supervisor state permissions, and document this behavior in the
code comments.
Clarify the presence of non-user feature and flag bits in the field
description.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-01 17:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-18 15:31 [PATCH v4 0/8] Introduce CET supervisor state support Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Always preserve non-user xfeatures/flags in __state_perm Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:17 ` Chang S. Bae [this message]
2025-04-01 17:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] x86/fpu: Drop @perm from guest pseudo FPU container Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:16 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 1:56 ` Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Add CET supervisor xfeature support Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:15 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 2:28 ` Chao Gao
2025-04-02 21:37 ` Dave Hansen
2025-04-03 13:26 ` Chao Gao
2025-04-03 14:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Differentiate default features for host and guest FPUs Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:18 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 3:16 ` Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] x86/fpu: Initialize guest FPU permissions from guest defaults Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] x86/fpu: Initialize guest fpstate and FPU pseudo container " Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce "guest-only" supervisor xfeature set Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:16 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 4:29 ` Chao Gao
2025-03-18 15:31 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] x86/fpu/xstate: Warn if guest-only supervisor states are detected in normal fpstate Chao Gao
2025-04-01 17:17 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 14:30 ` Chao Gao
2025-04-04 0:02 ` Chang S. Bae
2025-04-04 1:06 ` Dave Hansen
2025-04-01 17:20 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] Introduce CET supervisor state support Chang S. Bae
2025-04-02 21:12 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-04-02 21:35 ` Dave Hansen
2025-04-02 21:44 ` 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=37b9903a-e8fc-4d57-a1ae-2bd2f26a9974@intel.com \
--to=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com \
--cc=attofari@amazon.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=john.allen@amd.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=levymitchell0@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lirongqing@baidu.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=samuel.holland@sifive.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vigbalas@amd.com \
--cc=weijiang.yang@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin3.li@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).