From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
To: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@intel.com>,
chao.p.peng@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/split_lock: Don't try to handle user split lock in TDX guest
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 20:17:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33fe9716-ef3b-42f3-9806-4bd23fed6949@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lvobu4gpfsjg63syubgy2jwcja72folflrst7bu2eqv6rhaqre@ttbkykphu32f>
On 11/26/2025 7:25 PM, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 06:02:03PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
>> When the host enables split lock detection feature, the split lock from
>> guests (normal or TDX) triggers #AC. The #AC caused by split lock access
>> within a normal guest triggers a VM Exit and is handled in the host.
>> The #AC caused by split lock access within a TDX guest does not trigger
>> a VM Exit and instead it's delivered to the guest self.
>>
>> The default "warning" mode of handling split lock depends on being able
>> to temporarily disable detection to recover from the split lock event.
>> But the MSR that disables detection is not accessible to a guest.
>>
>> This means that TDX guests today can not disable the feature or use
>> the "warning" mode (which is the default). But, they can use the "fatal"
>> mode.
>>
>> Force TDX guests to use the "fatal" mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c
>> index 981f8b1f0792..f278e4ea3dd4 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c
>> @@ -315,9 +315,24 @@ void bus_lock_init(void)
>> wrmsrq(MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR, val);
>> }
>>
>> +static bool split_lock_fatal(void)
>> +{
>> + if (sld_state == sld_fatal)
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * TDX guests can not disable split lock detection.
>> + * Force them into the fatal behavior.
>> + */
>> + if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST))
>> + return true;
>> +
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> bool handle_user_split_lock(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
>> {
>> - if ((regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_AC) || sld_state == sld_fatal)
>> + if ((regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_AC) || split_lock_fatal())
>> return false;
>
> Maybe it would be cleaner to make it conditional on
> cpu_model_supports_sld instead of special-casing TDX guest?
>
> #AC on any platfrom when we didn't asked for it suppose to be fatal, no?
But TDX is the only one has such special non-architectural behavior.
For example, for normal VMs under KVM, the behavior is x86
architectural. MSR_TEST_CTRL is not accessible to normal VMs, and no
split lock #AC will be delivered to the normal VMs because it's handled
by KVM.
>> split_lock_warn(regs->ip);
>> return true;
>> --
>> 2.43.0
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-26 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-26 10:02 [PATCH 0/2] x86/split_lock: Fix and enhancement for TDX guest Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-26 10:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/split_lock: Don't try to handle user split lock in " Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-26 11:25 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2025-11-26 12:17 ` Xiaoyao Li [this message]
2025-11-26 13:35 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2025-11-27 2:00 ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-27 16:16 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2025-11-27 16:55 ` Andrew Cooper
2025-11-28 2:40 ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-28 2:28 ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-12-17 10:56 ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-11-26 10:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/split_lock: Describe #AC handling in TDX guest kernel log Xiaoyao Li
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=33fe9716-ef3b-42f3-9806-4bd23fed6949@intel.com \
--to=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chao.p.peng@intel.com \
--cc=chenyi.qiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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