Re: [PATCH] KVM: vmx: VMXOFF emulation in vm86 should cause #UD

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Aug 29, 2014, at 11:36 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Il 29/08/2014 10:26, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> Unlike VMCALL, the instructions VMXOFF, VMLAUNCH and VMRESUME should cause a UD
>> exception in real-mode or vm86.  However, the emulator considers all these
>> instructions the same for the matter of mode checks, and emulation upon exit
>> due to #UD exception.
>> 
>> As a result, the hypervisor behaves incorrectly on vm86 mode. VMXOFF, VMLAUNCH
>> or VMRESUME cause on vm86 exit due to #UD. The hypervisor then emulates these
>> instruction and inject #GP to the guest instead of #UD.
>> 
>> This patch creates a new group for these instructions and mark only VMCALL as
>> an instruction which can be emulated.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <namit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Patch looks good, but where is the check that MOD == 3 in the "case
> RMExt"?  Am I just not seeing it?
> 
This seems to be part of the “case GroupDual”.


>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 14 ++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
>> index e5bf130..a240fac 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
>> @@ -3139,12 +3139,8 @@ static int em_clts(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
>> 
>> static int em_vmcall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
>> {
>> -	int rc;
>> -
>> -	if (ctxt->modrm_mod != 3 || ctxt->modrm_rm != 1)
>> -		return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
>> +	int rc = ctxt->ops->fix_hypercall(ctxt);
>> 
>> -	rc = ctxt->ops->fix_hypercall(ctxt);
>> 	if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
>> 		return rc;
>> 
>> @@ -3562,6 +3558,12 @@ static int check_perm_out(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
>> 		F2bv(((_f) | DstReg | SrcMem | ModRM) & ~Lock, _e),	\
>> 		F2bv(((_f) & ~Lock) | DstAcc | SrcImm, _e)
>> 
>> +static const struct opcode group7_rm0[] = {
>> +	N,
>> +	I(SrcNone | Priv | EmulateOnUD,	em_vmcall),
>> +	N, N, N, N, N, N,
>> +};
>> +
>> static const struct opcode group7_rm1[] = {
>> 	DI(SrcNone | Priv, monitor),
>> 	DI(SrcNone | Priv, mwait),
>> @@ -3655,7 +3657,7 @@ static const struct group_dual group7 = { {
>> 	II(SrcMem16 | Mov | Priv,		em_lmsw, lmsw),
>> 	II(SrcMem | ByteOp | Priv | NoAccess,	em_invlpg, invlpg),
>> }, {
>> -	I(SrcNone | Priv | EmulateOnUD,	em_vmcall),
>> +	EXT(0, group7_rm0),
>> 	EXT(0, group7_rm1),
>> 	N, EXT(0, group7_rm3),
>> 	II(SrcNone | DstMem | Mov,		em_smsw, smsw), N,
>> 
> 
> --
> 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




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux