Il 16/06/2014 13:53, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
On 6/16/14, 2:09 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 16/06/2014 12:33, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
Do you get this if the input register has bit 31 set?
No. To be frank, the scenario may be considered a bit synthetic: the
guest assigns a value to a general-purpose register in 64-bit mode,
setting the high 32-bits to some non-zero value. Then, later, in 32-bit
mode, the guest performs MOV DR instruction. In between the two
assignments, the general purpose register is unmodified, so the high
32-bits of the general purpose registers are still set.
Note that this scenario does not occur when MOV DR is emulated, but when
handle_dr() is called. In this case, the entire 64-bits of the general
purpose register used for MOV DR are read, regardless to the execution
mode of the guest.
I wonder if the same bug happens elsewhere. For example,
kvm_emulate_hypercall doesn't look at CS.L/CS.DB, which is really a
corner case but arguably also a bug. kvm_hv_hypercall instead does it
right.
Perhaps we need a variant of kvm_register_read that (on 64-bit hosts)
checks EFER/CS.L/CS.DB and masks the returned value accordingly. You
could call it kvm_register_readl.
There are two questions that come in mind:
1. Should we ignore CS.DB? It would make it consistent with
kvm_hv_hypercall and handle_dr. I think this is the proper behavior.
It depends on what you're using it for, but as a start yes.
2. Reading CS.L once and masking all the registers (i.e., changing the
is_long_mode in kvm_emulate_hypercall to is_64_bit_mode) is likely to be
more efficient.
Yes, for the case of kvm_emulate_hypercall. Then you can build
kvm_register_readl on top of is_64bit_mode and fix this bug with that
function. Did you check that handle_cr is unaffected?
Paolo
--
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
