From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com
Cc: yang.zhong@intel.com, ravi.v.shankar@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com,
"Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: ping Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] x86: Fix ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_PERM and update the test
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 12:04:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a0bded7d-5bc0-12b9-2aca-c1c92d958293@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220129173647.27981-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Thomas, Dave,
can this series be included in 5.18 and CCed to stable?
The bug makes the __state_perm field completely wrong. As a result,
arch_prctl(ARCH_GET_XCOMP_PERM) only returns the features that were
requested last, forgetting what was already in __state_perm (the
"permitted" argument to __xstate_request_perm).
In KVM, it is a bit worse. It affects
arch_prctl(ARCH_GET_XCOMP_GUEST_PERM) in the same way and also
ioctl(KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID), but the bug can also make KVM return the
wrong xsave state size to userspace. It's likely to go unnoticed by
userspace until Intel adds non-dynamic states above a dynamic one, but
potentially userspace could allocate a buffer that is too small.
Paolo
On 1/29/22 18:36, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> Changes from V3:
> * Rebased onto 5.17-rc1.
>
> V3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211110003209.21666-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com/
>
> ---
>
> The recent x86 dynamic state support incorporates the arch_prctl option to
> request permission before using a dynamic state.
>
> It was designed to add the requested feature in the group leader's
> permission bitmask so that every thread can reference this master bitmask.
> The group leader is assumed to be unchanged here. The mainline is the case
> as a group leader is identified at fork() or exec() time only.
>
> This master bitmask should include non-dynamic features always, as they
> are permitted by default. Users may check them via ARCH_GET_XCOMP_PERM.
>
> But, in hindsight, the implementation does overwrite the bitmask with the
> requested bit only, instead of adding the bit to the existing one. This
> overwrite effectively revokes the permission that is granted already.
>
> Fix the code and also update the selftest to disclose the issue if there
> is.
>
> Chang S. Bae (1):
> selftests/x86/amx: Update the ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_PERM test
>
> Yang Zhong (1):
> x86/arch_prctl: Fix the ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_PERM implementation
>
> arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/x86/amx.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>
> base-commit: e783362eb54cd99b2cac8b3a9aeac942e6f6ac07
next parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-23 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20220129173647.27981-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
2022-03-23 11:04 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2022-03-23 12:27 ` ping Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] x86: Fix ARCH_REQ_XCOMP_PERM and update the test Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 12:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 14:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-03-23 17:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-03-23 17:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=a0bded7d-5bc0-12b9-2aca-c1c92d958293@gnu.org \
--to=bonzini@gnu.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yang.zhong@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