From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction"
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 23:29:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180329212932.GA27107@flask> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1522198134-2709-3-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
2018-03-27 17:48-0700, Wanpeng Li:
> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
>
> There is no easy way to force KVM to run an instruction through the emulator
> (by design as that will expose the x86 emulator as a significant attack-surface).
> However, we do wish to expose the x86 emulator in case we are testing it
> (e.g. via kvm-unit-tests). Therefore, this patch adds a "force emulation prefix"
> that is designed to raise #UD which KVM will trap and it's #UD exit-handler will
> match "force emulation prefix" to run instruction after prefix by the x86 emulator.
> To not expose the x86 emulator by default, we add a module parameter that should
> be off by default.
>
> A simple testcase here:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> #define HYPERVISOR_INFO 0x40000000
>
> #define CPUID(idx, eax, ebx, ecx, edx) \
> asm volatile (\
> "ud2a; .ascii \"kvm\"; cpuid" \
> :"=b" (*ebx), "=a" (*eax), "=c" (*ecx), "=d" (*edx) \
> :"0"(idx) );
>
> void main()
> {
> unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> char string[13];
>
> CPUID(HYPERVISOR_INFO, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 0) = ebx;
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 4) = ecx;
> *(unsigned int *)(string + 8) = edx;
>
> string[12] = 0;
> if (strncmp(string, "KVMKVMKVM\0\0\0", 12) == 0)
> printf("kvm guest\n");
> else
> printf("bare hardware\n");
> }
>
> Suggested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> Cc: Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -146,6 +146,9 @@ bool __read_mostly enable_vmware_backdoor = false;
> module_param(enable_vmware_backdoor, bool, S_IRUGO);
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(enable_vmware_backdoor);
>
> +static bool __read_mostly force_emulation_prefix = false;
> +module_param(force_emulation_prefix, bool, S_IRUGO);
> +
> #define KVM_NR_SHARED_MSRS 16
>
> struct kvm_shared_msrs_global {
> @@ -4843,8 +4846,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_write_guest_virt_system);
> int handle_ud(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> enum emulation_result er;
> + int emulation_type = EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD;
> +
> + if (force_emulation_prefix) {
> + char sig[5]; /* ud2; .ascii "kvm" */
> + struct x86_exception e;
> +
> + kvm_read_guest_virt(&vcpu->arch.emulate_ctxt,
> + kvm_get_linear_rip(vcpu), sig, sizeof(sig), &e);
> + if (memcmp(sig, "\xf\xbkvm", sizeof(sig)) == 0) {
> + emulation_type = 0;
> + kvm_rip_write(vcpu, kvm_rip_read(vcpu) + sizeof(sig));
> + }
> + }
>
> - er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD);
> + er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, emulation_type);
> if (er == EMULATE_USER_EXIT)
> return 0;
> if (er != EMULATE_DONE)
The code afterwards is going to inject an #UD if the emulation failed.
I think that preserving the cpu state and forwarding the emulation
failure to userspace would be more useful. The change would probably be
best as:
if (memcmp(sig, "\xf\xbkvm", sizeof(sig)) == 0) {
kvm_rip_write(vcpu, kvm_rip_read(vcpu) + sizeof(sig));
return emulate_instruction(vcpu, 0) == EMULATE_DONE;
}
Looks great otherwise, thanks.
(We want to use this in emulate.c kvm-unit-test that currently fails
because of a hack that doesn't work anymore.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-29 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-28 0:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction" Wanpeng Li
2018-03-28 0:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] KVM: X86: Introduce handle_ud() Wanpeng Li
2018-03-28 0:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: X86: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the next instruction" Wanpeng Li
2018-03-29 21:29 ` Radim Krčmář [this message]
2018-04-01 11:12 ` Wanpeng Li
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-03-28 6:55 Liran Alon
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=20180329212932.GA27107@flask \
--to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liran.alon@oracle.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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