From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: SVM: Filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers on bare metal
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 14:05:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aR4_EM5bWKSQ4iOS@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60f7c9b3-312f-41e2-ab47-c4361df1d825@redhat.com>
On Sat, Nov 15, 2025, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/13/25 23:56, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Explicitly filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers, as
> > svm_exit_handlers[] will never be sized with entries that use bits 63:32.
> >
> > Processing the non-failing exit code as a 32-bit value will allow tracking
> > exit_code as a single 64-bit value (which it is, architecturally). This
> > will also allow hardening KVM against Spectre-like attacks without needing
> > to do silly things to avoid build failures on 32-bit kernels
> > (array_index_nospec() rightly asserts that the index fits in an "unsigned
> > long").
> >
> > Omit the check when running as a VM, as KVM has historically failed to set
> > bits 63:32 appropriately when synthesizing VM-Exits, i.e. KVM could get
> > false positives when running as a VM on an older, broken KVM/kernel. From
> > a functional perspective, omitting the check is "fine", as any unwanted
> > collision between e.g. VMEXIT_INVALID and a 32-bit exit code will be
> > fatal to KVM-on-KVM regardless of what KVM-as-L1 does.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > index 202a4d8088a2..3b05476296d0 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > @@ -3433,8 +3433,22 @@ static void dump_vmcb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > sev_free_decrypted_vmsa(vcpu, save);
> > }
> > -int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 exit_code)
> > +int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __exit_code)
> > {
> > + u32 exit_code = __exit_code;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * SVM uses negative values, i.e. 64-bit values, to indicate that VMRUN
> > + * failed. Report all such errors to userspace (note, VMEXIT_INVALID,
> > + * a.k.a. SVM_EXIT_ERR, is special cased by svm_handle_exit()). Skip
> > + * the check when running as a VM, as KVM has historically left garbage
> > + * in bits 63:32, i.e. running KVM-on-KVM would hit false positives if
> > + * the underlying kernel is buggy.
> > + */
> > + if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) &&
> > + (u64)exit_code != __exit_code)
> > + goto unexpected_vmexit;
>
> I reviewed the series and it looks good, but with respect to this patch and
> patch 8, is it really worth it? While there is a possibility that code
> 0x00000000ffffffff is used, or that any high 32-bit values other than
> all-zeros or all-ones are used, they'd be presumably enabled by some control
> bits in the VMCB or some paravirt thing in the hypervisor.
Maybe. E.g. TDCALL and SEAMCALL VM-Exits on Intel show up without any enablement
in software (beyond VMXON). I completely agree that it's extremely unlikely that
AMD will add a on-negative exit code with bits 63:32 != 0, i.e. that we could get
a false positive when truncating exit_code to a u32, but it also seems harmless
to be paranoid.
FWIW, I was assuming VMEXIT_INVALID_PMC (-4) was a generic vPMU thing, but it
looks like that one is also SEV-ES+ specific.
As for e57b84699534 ("KVM: SVM: Limit incorrect check on SVM_EXIT_ERR to running
as a VM"), I agree that being paranoid probably doesn't do anything in practice,
but I like being consistent. :-)
> What really matters is that SEV-ES's kvm_get_cached_sw_exit_code() is
> reading the full 64 bits and discarding invalid codes before reaching
> svm_invoke_exit_handler().
No? sev_handle_vmgexit() only handles SVM_VMGEXIT_xxx exit codes, everything
else is punted to svm_invoke_exit_handler()
exit_code = kvm_get_cached_sw_exit_code(control);
switch (exit_code) {
case SVM_VMGEXIT_<0>
...
case SVM_VMGEXIT_<N>
default:
ret = svm_invoke_exit_handler(vcpu, exit_code);
}
And I don't see anything that filters/modifies exit_code_hi.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-19 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-13 22:56 [PATCH 0/9] KVM: SVM: Fix (hilarious) exit_code bugs Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 1/9] KVM: nSVM: Clear exit_code_hi in VMCB when synthesizing nested VM-Exits Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:03 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 2/9] KVM: nSVM: Set exit_code_hi to -1 when synthesizing SVM_EXIT_ERR (failed VMRUN) Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:17 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 23:28 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 3/9] KVM: SVM: Add a helper to detect VMRUN failures Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:30 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 23:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 4/9] KVM: SVM: Open code handling of unexpected exits in svm_invoke_exit_handler() Sean Christopherson
2025-11-13 23:33 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 5/9] KVM: SVM: Check for an unexpected VM-Exit after RETPOLINE "fast" handling Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:04 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 6/9] KVM: SVM: Filter out 64-bit exit codes when invoking exit handlers on bare metal Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:06 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-14 23:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-11-19 22:05 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 7/9] KVM: SVM: Treat exit_code as an unsigned 64-bit value through all of KVM Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:08 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-14 5:26 ` Michael Kelley
2025-11-14 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 18:29 ` Wei Liu
2025-11-14 18:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 18:40 ` Wei Liu
2025-11-14 15:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 15:47 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 23:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 8/9] KVM: SVM: Limit incorrect check on SVM_EXIT_ERR to running as a VM Sean Christopherson
2025-11-14 0:11 ` Yosry Ahmed
2025-11-13 22:56 ` [PATCH 9/9] KVM: SVM: Harden exit_code against being used in Spectre-like attacks Sean Christopherson
2025-12-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 0/9] KVM: SVM: Fix (hilarious) exit_code bugs 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=aR4_EM5bWKSQ4iOS@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=decui@microsoft.com \
--cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kys@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wei.liu@kernel.org \
--cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
/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).