public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: x86: Fix out-of-bounds access in kvm_recalculate_phys_map()
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 17:07:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZG/4UN2VpZ1a6ek1@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230525183347.2562472-2-mhal@rbox.co>

On Thu, May 25, 2023, Michal Luczaj wrote:
> Handle the case of vCPU addition and/or APIC enabling during the APIC map
> recalculations. Check the sanity of x2APIC ID in !x2apic_format &&
> apic_x2apic_mode() case.
> 
> kvm_recalculate_apic_map() creates the APIC map iterating over the list of
> vCPUs twice. First to find the max APIC ID and allocate a max-sized buffer,
> then again, calling kvm_recalculate_phys_map() for each vCPU. This opens a
> race window: value of max APIC ID can increase _after_ the buffer was
> allocated.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> index e542cf285b51..39b9a318d04c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> @@ -265,10 +265,14 @@ static int kvm_recalculate_phys_map(struct kvm_apic_map *new,
>  		 * mapped, i.e. is aliased to multiple vCPUs.  The optimized
>  		 * map requires a strict 1:1 mapping between IDs and vCPUs.
>  		 */
> -		if (apic_x2apic_mode(apic))
> +		if (apic_x2apic_mode(apic)) {
> +			if (x2apic_id > new->max_apic_id)
> +				return -EINVAL;

Hmm, disabling the optimized map just because userspace created a new vCPU is
unfortunate and unnecessary.  Rather than return -EINVAL and only perform the
check when x2APIC is enabled, what if we instead do the check immediately and
return -E2BIG?  Then the caller can retry with a bigger array size.  Preemption
is enabled and retries are bounded by the number of possible vCPUs, so I don't
see any obvious issues with retrying.

And I vote to also add a sanity check on xapic_id, if only to provide documentation
as to why it can't overflow.

I think hoisting the checks up would also obviate the need for cleanup (patch 2),
which I agree isn't obviously better.

E.g. this?  Compile tested only.  I'll test more tomorrow unless you beat me to
it.  Thanks for the fun bugs, as always :-)

---
 arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
index e542cf285b51..cd34b88c937a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -228,6 +228,12 @@ static int kvm_recalculate_phys_map(struct kvm_apic_map *new,
 	u32 xapic_id = kvm_xapic_id(apic);
 	u32 physical_id;
 
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(xapic_id >= new->max_apic_id))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (x2apic_id >= new->max_apic_id)
+		return -E2BIG;
+
 	/*
 	 * Deliberately truncate the vCPU ID when detecting a mismatched APIC
 	 * ID to avoid false positives if the vCPU ID, i.e. x2APIC ID, is a
@@ -253,8 +259,7 @@ static int kvm_recalculate_phys_map(struct kvm_apic_map *new,
 	 */
 	if (vcpu->kvm->arch.x2apic_format) {
 		/* See also kvm_apic_match_physical_addr(). */
-		if ((apic_x2apic_mode(apic) || x2apic_id > 0xff) &&
-			x2apic_id <= new->max_apic_id)
+		if (apic_x2apic_mode(apic) || x2apic_id > 0xff)
 			new->phys_map[x2apic_id] = apic;
 
 		if (!apic_x2apic_mode(apic) && !new->phys_map[xapic_id])
@@ -366,6 +371,7 @@ void kvm_recalculate_apic_map(struct kvm *kvm)
 	unsigned long i;
 	u32 max_id = 255; /* enough space for any xAPIC ID */
 	bool xapic_id_mismatch = false;
+	int r;
 
 	/* Read kvm->arch.apic_map_dirty before kvm->arch.apic_map.  */
 	if (atomic_read_acquire(&kvm->arch.apic_map_dirty) == CLEAN)
@@ -386,6 +392,7 @@ void kvm_recalculate_apic_map(struct kvm *kvm)
 		return;
 	}
 
+retry:
 	kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm)
 		if (kvm_apic_present(vcpu))
 			max_id = max(max_id, kvm_x2apic_id(vcpu->arch.apic));
@@ -404,9 +411,13 @@ void kvm_recalculate_apic_map(struct kvm *kvm)
 		if (!kvm_apic_present(vcpu))
 			continue;
 
-		if (kvm_recalculate_phys_map(new, vcpu, &xapic_id_mismatch)) {
+		r = kvm_recalculate_phys_map(new, vcpu, &xapic_id_mismatch);
+		if (r) {
 			kvfree(new);
 			new = NULL;
+			if (r == -E2BIG)
+				goto retry;
+
 			goto out;
 		}
 

base-commit: 39428f6ea9eace95011681628717062ff7f5eb5f
--

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-26  0:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-25 18:33 [PATCH 0/3] Out-of-bounds access in kvm_recalculate_phys_map() Michal Luczaj
2023-05-25 18:33 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: x86: Fix out-of-bounds " Michal Luczaj
2023-05-26  0:07   ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2023-05-26 10:52     ` Michal Luczaj
2023-05-26 16:17       ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-26 17:17         ` Michal Luczaj
2023-05-26 18:11           ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-26 22:27           ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-25 18:33 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86: Simplify APIC ID selection " Michal Luczaj
2023-05-25 18:33 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: selftests: Add test for race in kvm_recalculate_apic_map() Michal Luczaj
2023-05-26 23:40   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-05-28 17:26     ` Michal Luczaj
2023-06-02  0:26       ` 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=ZG/4UN2VpZ1a6ek1@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhal@rbox.co \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=shuah@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