[PATCH 5.7 099/112] x86/split_lock: Dont write MSR_TEST_CTRL on CPUs that arent whitelisted

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-07-07T15:27:59Z

From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>

commit 009bce1df0bb5eb970b9eb98d963861f7fe353c7 upstream.

Choo! Choo! All aboard the Split Lock Express, with direct service to
Wreckage!

Skip split_lock_verify_msr() if the CPU isn't whitelisted as a possible
SLD-enabled CPU model to avoid writing MSR_TEST_CTRL. MSR_TEST_CTRL
exists, and is writable, on many generations of CPUs. Writing the MSR,
even with '0', can result in bizarre, undocumented behavior.

This fixes a crash on Haswell when resuming from suspend with a live KVM
guest. Because APs use the standard SMP boot flow for resume, they will
go through split_lock_init() and the subsequent RDMSR/WRMSR sequence,
which runs even when sld_state==sld_off to ensure SLD is disabled. On
Haswell (at least, my Haswell), writing MSR_TEST_CTRL with '0' will
succeed and _may_ take the SMT _sibling_ out of VMX root mode.

When KVM has an active guest, KVM performs VMXON as part of CPU onlining
(see kvm_starting_cpu()). Because SMP boot is serialized, the resulting
flow is effectively:

on_each_ap_cpu() {
WRMSR(MSR_TEST_CTRL, 0)
VMXON
}

As a result, the WRMSR can disable VMX on a different CPU that has
already done VMXON. This ultimately results in a #UD on VMPTRLD when
KVM regains control and attempt run its vCPUs.

The above voodoo was confirmed by reworking KVM's VMXON flow to write
MSR_TEST_CTRL prior to VMXON, and to serialize the sequence as above.
Further verification of the insanity was done by redoing VMXON on all
APs after the initial WRMSR->VMXON sequence. The additional VMXON,
which should VM-Fail, occasionally succeeded, and also eliminated the
unexpected #UD on VMPTRLD.

The damage done by writing MSR_TEST_CTRL doesn't appear to be limited
to VMX, e.g. after suspend with an active KVM guest, subsequent reboots
almost always hang (even when fudging VMXON), a #UD on a random Jcc was
observed, suspend/resume stability is qualitatively poor, and so on and
so forth.

kernel BUG at arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:386!
CPU: 1 PID: 2592 Comm: CPU 6/KVM Tainted: G D
Hardware name: ASUS Q87M-E/Q87M-E, BIOS 1102 03/03/2014
RIP: 0010:kvm_spurious_fault+0xf/0x20
Call Trace:
vmx_vcpu_load_vmcs+0x1fb/0x2b0
vmx_vcpu_load+0x3e/0x160
kvm_arch_vcpu_load+0x48/0x260
finish_task_switch+0x140/0x260
__schedule+0x460/0x720
_cond_resched+0x2d/0x40
kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x82e/0x1ca0
kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x363/0x5c0
ksys_ioctl+0x88/0xa0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20
do_syscall_64+0x4c/0x170
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

Fixes: dbaba47085b0c ("x86/split_lock: Rework the initialization flow of split lock detection")
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200605192605.7439-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
@@ -49,6 +49,13 @@ static enum split_lock_detect_state sld_
static u64 msr_test_ctrl_cache __ro_after_init;

/*
+ * With a name like MSR_TEST_CTL it should go without saying, but don't touch
+ * MSR_TEST_CTL unless the CPU is one of the whitelisted models. Writing it
+ * on CPUs that do not support SLD can cause fireworks, even when writing '0'.
+ */
+static bool cpu_model_supports_sld __ro_after_init;
+
+/*
* Processors which have self-snooping capability can handle conflicting
* memory type across CPUs by snooping its own cache. However, there exists
* CPU models in which having conflicting memory types still leads to
@@ -1064,7 +1071,8 @@ static void sld_update_msr(bool on)

static void split_lock_init(void)
{
- split_lock_verify_msr(sld_state != sld_off);
+ if (cpu_model_supports_sld)
+ split_lock_verify_msr(sld_state != sld_off);
}

static void split_lock_warn(unsigned long ip)
@@ -1167,5 +1175,6 @@ void __init cpu_set_core_cap_bits(struct
return;
}

+ cpu_model_supports_sld = true;
split_lock_setup();
}