On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 10:17 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The current guest mitigation of TAA is both too heavy and not really
> sufficient. It is too heavy because it will cause some affected CPUs
> (those that have MDS_NO but lack TAA_NO) to fall back to VERW and
> get the corresponding slowdown. It is not really sufficient because
> it will cause the MDS_NO bit to disappear upon microcode update, so
> that VMs started before the microcode update will not be runnable
> anymore afterwards, even with tsx=on.
>
> Instead, if tsx=on on the host, we can emulate MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL for
> the guest and let it run without the VERW mitigation. Even though
> MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL is quite heavyweight, and we do not want to write
> it on every vmentry, we can use the shared MSR functionality because
> the host kernel need not protect itself from TSX-based side-channels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 23 +++++------------------
> 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> index 04a8212704c1..ed25fe7d5234 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ noinline void invept_error(unsigned long ext, u64 eptp, gpa_t gpa)
> MSR_SYSCALL_MASK, MSR_LSTAR, MSR_CSTAR,
> #endif
> MSR_EFER, MSR_TSC_AUX, MSR_STAR,
> + MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL,
> };
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV)
> @@ -1683,6 +1684,9 @@ static void setup_msrs(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> index = __find_msr_index(vmx, MSR_TSC_AUX);
> if (index >= 0 && guest_cpuid_has(&vmx->vcpu, X86_FEATURE_RDTSCP))
> move_msr_up(vmx, index, save_nmsrs++);
> + index = __find_msr_index(vmx, MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL);
> + if (index >= 0)
> + move_msr_up(vmx, index, save_nmsrs++);
>
> vmx->save_nmsrs = save_nmsrs;
> vmx->guest_msrs_ready = false;
> @@ -1782,6 +1786,11 @@ static int vmx_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> #endif
> case MSR_EFER:
> return kvm_get_msr_common(vcpu, msr_info);
> + case MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL:
> + if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> + !(vcpu->arch.arch_capabilities & ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR))
> + return 1;
> + goto find_shared_msr;
> case MSR_IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL:
> if (!msr_info->host_initiated && !vmx_has_waitpkg(vmx))
> return 1;
> @@ -1884,8 +1893,9 @@ static int vmx_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_RDTSCP))
> return 1;
> - /* Else, falls through */
> + goto find_shared_msr;
> default:
> + find_shared_msr:
> msr = find_msr_entry(vmx, msr_info->index);
> if (msr) {
> msr_info->data = msr->data;
> @@ -2001,6 +2011,13 @@ static int vmx_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL,
> MSR_TYPE_RW);
> break;
> + case MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL:
> + if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> + !(vcpu->arch.arch_capabilities & ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR))
> + return 1;
> + if (data & ~(TSX_CTRL_RTM_DISABLE | TSX_CTRL_CPUID_CLEAR))
> + return 1;
> + goto find_shared_msr;
> case MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD:
> if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL))
> @@ -2152,8 +2169,10 @@ static int vmx_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> /* Check reserved bit, higher 32 bits should be zero */
> if ((data >> 32) != 0)
> return 1;
> - /* Else, falls through */
> + goto find_shared_msr;
> +
> default:
> + find_shared_msr:
> msr = find_msr_entry(vmx, msr_index);
> if (msr) {
> u64 old_msr_data = msr->data;
> @@ -4234,7 +4253,16 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_setup(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> continue;
> vmx->guest_msrs[j].index = i;
> vmx->guest_msrs[j].data = 0;
> - vmx->guest_msrs[j].mask = -1ull;
> +
> + switch (index) {
> + case MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL:
> + /* No need to pass TSX_CTRL_CPUID_CLEAR through. */
> + vmx->guest_msrs[j].mask = ~(u64)TSX_CTRL_CPUID_CLEAR;
> + break;
> + default:
> + vmx->guest_msrs[j].mask = -1ull;
> + break;
> + }
> ++vmx->nmsrs;
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 648e84e728fc..fc54e3905fe3 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -1314,29 +1314,16 @@ static u64 kvm_get_arch_capabilities(void)
> data |= ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO;
>
> /*
> - * On TAA affected systems, export MDS_NO=0 when:
> - * - TSX is enabled on the host, i.e. X86_FEATURE_RTM=1.
> - * - Updated microcode is present. This is detected by
> - * the presence of ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR and ensures
> - * that VERW clears CPU buffers.
> - *
> - * When MDS_NO=0 is exported, guests deploy clear CPU buffer
> - * mitigation and don't complain:
> - *
> - * "Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode"
> - *
> - * If TSX is disabled on the system, guests are also mitigated against
> - * TAA and clear CPU buffer mitigation is not required for guests.
> + * On TAA affected systems:
> + * - nothing to do if TSX is disabled on the host.
> + * - we emulate TSX_CTRL if present on the host.
> + * This lets the guest use VERW to clear CPU buffers.
> */
> if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_RTM))
> - data &= ~ARCH_CAP_TAA_NO;
> + data &= ~(ARCH_CAP_TAA_NO | ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR);
> else if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_TAA))
> data |= ARCH_CAP_TAA_NO;
> - else if (data & ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR)
> - data &= ~ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO;
>
> - /* KVM does not emulate MSR_IA32_TSX_CTRL. */
> - data &= ~ARCH_CAP_TSX_CTRL_MSR;
Shouldn't kvm be masking off any bits that it doesn't know about here?
Who knows what future features we may claim to support?
> return data;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_get_arch_capabilities);
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
>
