On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo <gsomlo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Treat monitor and mwait instructions as nop, which is architecturally
> correct (but inefficient) behavior. We do this to prevent misbehaving
> guests (e.g. OS X <= 10.7) from crashing after they fail to check for
> monitor/mwait availability via cpuid.
>
> Since mwait-based idle loops relying on these nop-emulated instructions
> would keep the host CPU pegged at 100%, do NOT advertise their presence
> via cpuid, to prevent compliant guests from using them inadvertently.
If it's going to peg the host CPU at 100% anyway, why bother emulating
it? Just let the guest run the mwait instruction! Have a condition
that controls whether CPU_BASED_MWAIT_EXITING gets set in the VMCS
processor execution controls. Go ahead and put it in CPUID, since
it's actually allowed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel L. Somlo <somlo@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> New in v2: remove invalid_op handler functions which were only used to
> handle exits caused by monitor and mwait
>
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:31:27PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 05/07/2014 08:15 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> >If we really want to be paranoid and worry about guests
>> >that use this strange way to trigger invalid opcode,
>> >we can make it possible for userspace to enable/disable
>> >this hack, and teach qemu to set it.
>> >
>> >That would make it even safer than it was.
>> >
>> >Not sure it's worth it, just a thought.
>>
>> Since we don't trap on non-exposed other instructions (new SSE and
>> whatdoiknow) I don't think it's really bad to just expose
>> MONITOR/MWAIT as nops.
>
> So AFAICT, linux prefers to use mwait for idling if cpuid tells it that
> it's available. If we keep telling everyone that we do NOT have monitor
> and mwait available, compliant guests will never end up using them, and
> this hack would remain completely invisible to them, which is good
> (better to use hlt-based idle loops when you're a vm guest, that would
> actually allow the host to relax while you're halted :)
>
> So the only time anyone would be able to tell we have this hack would be
> when they're about to receive an invalid opcode for using monitor/mwait
> in violation of what CPUID (would have) told them. That's what happens
> to OS X prior to 10.8, which is when I'm hypothesizing the Apple devs
> begain to seriously think about their OS running as a vm guest (on fusion
> and parallels)...
>
> Instead of killing the misbehaving guest with an invalid opcode, we'd
> allow them to peg the host CPU with their monitor == mwait == nop idle
> loop instead, which, at least on OS X, should be tolerable long enough
> to run 'rm -rf System/Library/Extensions/AppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext'
> and reboot the guest, after which things would settle down by reverting
> the guest to a hlt-based idle loop.
>
> The only reason I can think of to add functionality for enabling/disabling
> this hack would be to protect against a malicious guest which would use
> mwait *on purpose* to peg the host CPU. But a malicious guest could just
> run "for(;;);" in ring 0 and accomplish the same goal, so we wouldn't
> really gain anything in exchange for the added complexity...
>
> Thanks,
> Gabriel
>
> arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 2 ++
> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> index f47a104..d094fc6 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> @@ -283,6 +283,8 @@ static inline int __do_cpuid_ent(struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry, u32 function,
> 0 /* Reserved */ | f_lm | F(3DNOWEXT) | F(3DNOW);
> /* cpuid 1.ecx */
> const u32 kvm_supported_word4_x86_features =
> + /* NOTE: MONITOR (and MWAIT) are emulated as NOP,
> + * but *not* advertised to guests via CPUID ! */
> F(XMM3) | F(PCLMULQDQ) | 0 /* DTES64, MONITOR */ |
> 0 /* DS-CPL, VMX, SMX, EST */ |
> 0 /* TM2 */ | F(SSSE3) | 0 /* CNXT-ID */ | 0 /* Reserved */ |
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> index 7f4f9c2..0b7d58d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> @@ -2770,12 +2770,6 @@ static int xsetbv_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> return 1;
> }
>
> -static int invalid_op_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> -{
> - kvm_queue_exception(&svm->vcpu, UD_VECTOR);
> - return 1;
> -}
> -
> static int task_switch_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> {
> u16 tss_selector;
> @@ -3287,6 +3281,24 @@ static int pause_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static int nop_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> +{
> + skip_emulated_instruction(&(svm->vcpu));
> + return 1;
> +}
> +
> +static int monitor_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> +{
> + printk_once(KERN_WARNING "kvm: MONITOR instruction emulated as NOP!\n");
> + return nop_interception(svm);
> +}
> +
> +static int mwait_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> +{
> + printk_once(KERN_WARNING "kvm: MWAIT instruction emulated as NOP!\n");
> + return nop_interception(svm);
> +}
> +
> static int (*const svm_exit_handlers[])(struct vcpu_svm *svm) = {
> [SVM_EXIT_READ_CR0] = cr_interception,
> [SVM_EXIT_READ_CR3] = cr_interception,
> @@ -3344,8 +3356,8 @@ static int (*const svm_exit_handlers[])(struct vcpu_svm *svm) = {
> [SVM_EXIT_CLGI] = clgi_interception,
> [SVM_EXIT_SKINIT] = skinit_interception,
> [SVM_EXIT_WBINVD] = emulate_on_interception,
> - [SVM_EXIT_MONITOR] = invalid_op_interception,
> - [SVM_EXIT_MWAIT] = invalid_op_interception,
> + [SVM_EXIT_MONITOR] = monitor_interception,
> + [SVM_EXIT_MWAIT] = mwait_interception,
> [SVM_EXIT_XSETBV] = xsetbv_interception,
> [SVM_EXIT_NPF] = pf_interception,
> };
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index 33e8c02..3ccbcb1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -5669,12 +5669,24 @@ static int handle_pause(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return 1;
> }
>
> -static int handle_invalid_op(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +static int handle_nop(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - kvm_queue_exception(vcpu, UD_VECTOR);
> + skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static int handle_mwait(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + printk_once(KERN_WARNING "kvm: MWAIT instruction emulated as NOP!\n");
> + return handle_nop(vcpu);
> +}
> +
> +static int handle_monitor(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + printk_once(KERN_WARNING "kvm: MONITOR instruction emulated as NOP!\n");
> + return handle_nop(vcpu);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * To run an L2 guest, we need a vmcs02 based on the L1-specified vmcs12.
> * We could reuse a single VMCS for all the L2 guests, but we also want the
> @@ -6571,8 +6583,8 @@ static int (*const kvm_vmx_exit_handlers[])(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) = {
> [EXIT_REASON_EPT_VIOLATION] = handle_ept_violation,
> [EXIT_REASON_EPT_MISCONFIG] = handle_ept_misconfig,
> [EXIT_REASON_PAUSE_INSTRUCTION] = handle_pause,
> - [EXIT_REASON_MWAIT_INSTRUCTION] = handle_invalid_op,
> - [EXIT_REASON_MONITOR_INSTRUCTION] = handle_invalid_op,
> + [EXIT_REASON_MWAIT_INSTRUCTION] = handle_mwait,
> + [EXIT_REASON_MONITOR_INSTRUCTION] = handle_monitor,
> [EXIT_REASON_INVEPT] = handle_invept,
> };
>
> --
> 1.9.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
