From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
To: "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
"seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"kas@kernel.org" <kas@kernel.org>,
"Li, Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
"hou, wenlong" <houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"linux-coco@lists.linux.dev" <linux-coco@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] KVM: TDX: Synchronize user-return MSRs immediately after VP.ENTER
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 18:54:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <38df6c8bfd384e5fefa8eb6fbc27c35b99c685ed.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aPehbDzbMHZTEtMa@google.com>
On Tue, 2025-10-21 at 08:06 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> I think we should be synchronizing only after a successful VP.ENTER with a real
> > > TD exit, but today instead we synchronize after any attempt to VP.ENTER.
>
> Well this is all completely @#($*#. Looking at the TDX-Module source, if the
> TDX-Module synthesizes an exit, e.g. because it suspects a zero-step attack, it
> will signal a "normal" exit but not "restore" VMM state.
Oh yea, good point. So there is no way to tell from the return code if the
clobbering happened.
>
> > If the MSR's do not get clobbered, does it matter whether or not they get
> > restored.
>
> It matters because KVM needs to know the actual value in hardware. If KVM thinks
> an MSR is 'X', but it's actually 'Y', then KVM could fail to write the correct
> value into hardware when returning to userspace and/or when running a different
> vCPU.
>
> Taking a step back, the entire approach of updating the "cache" after the fact is
> ridiculous. TDX entry/exit is anything but fast; avoiding _at most_ 4x WRMSRs at
> the start of the run loop is a very, very premature optimization. Preemptively
> load hardware with the value that the TDX-Module _might_ set and call it good.
>
> I'll replace patches 1 and 4 with this, tagged for stable@.
Seems reasonable to me in concept, but there is a bug. It looks like some
important MSR isn't getting restored right and the host gets into a bad state.
The first signs start with triggering this:
asmlinkage __visible noinstr struct pt_regs *fixup_bad_iret(struct pt_regs
*bad_regs)
{
struct pt_regs tmp, *new_stack;
/*
* This is called from entry_64.S early in handling a fault
* caused by a bad iret to user mode. To handle the fault
* correctly, we want to move our stack frame to where it would
* be had we entered directly on the entry stack (rather than
* just below the IRET frame) and we want to pretend that the
* exception came from the IRET target.
*/
new_stack = (struct pt_regs *)__this_cpu_read(cpu_tss_rw.x86_tss.sp0) -
1;
/* Copy the IRET target to the temporary storage. */
__memcpy(&tmp.ip, (void *)bad_regs->sp, 5*8);
/* Copy the remainder of the stack from the current stack. */
__memcpy(&tmp, bad_regs, offsetof(struct pt_regs, ip));
/* Update the entry stack */
__memcpy(new_stack, &tmp, sizeof(tmp));
BUG_ON(!user_mode(new_stack)); <---------------HERE
Need to debug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-21 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-16 22:28 [PATCH v4 0/4] KVM: x86: User-return MSR cleanups Sean Christopherson
2025-10-16 22:28 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] KVM: TDX: Synchronize user-return MSRs immediately after VP.ENTER Sean Christopherson
2025-10-20 22:55 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-10-21 13:37 ` Adrian Hunter
2025-10-21 15:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-21 16:36 ` Adrian Hunter
2025-10-21 16:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-21 18:54 ` Edgecombe, Rick P [this message]
2025-10-21 19:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-21 20:49 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2025-10-23 5:59 ` Xiaoyao Li
2025-10-16 22:28 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] KVM: x86: Leave user-return notifier registered on reboot/shutdown Sean Christopherson
2025-10-17 5:32 ` Chao Gao
2025-10-17 15:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-16 22:28 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] KVM: x86: Don't disable IRQs when unregistering user-return notifier Sean Christopherson
2025-10-16 22:28 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] KVM: x86: Drop "cache" from user return MSR setter that skips WRMSR Sean Christopherson
2025-10-17 2:52 ` Chao Gao
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=38df6c8bfd384e5fefa8eb6fbc27c35b99c685ed.camel@intel.com \
--to=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=houwenlong.hwl@antgroup.com \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@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).