On 1/15/2024 5:58 PM, Yuan Yao wrote:
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 09:02:35AM -0500, Yang Weijiang wrote:Enable/disable CET MSRs interception per associated feature configuration. Shadow Stack feature requires all CET MSRs passed through to guest to make it supported in user and supervisor mode while IBT feature only depends on MSR_IA32_{U,S}_CETS_CET to enable user and supervisor IBT. Note, this MSR design introduced an architectural limitation of SHSTK and IBT control for guest, i.e., when SHSTK is exposed, IBT is also available to guest from architectual perspective since IBT relies on subset of SHSTK relevant MSRs. Signed-off-by: Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@xxxxxxxxx> --- arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c index 064a5fe87948..08058b182893 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c @@ -692,6 +692,10 @@ static bool is_valid_passthrough_msr(u32 msr) case MSR_LBR_CORE_TO ... MSR_LBR_CORE_TO + 8: /* LBR MSRs. These are handled in vmx_update_intercept_for_lbr_msrs() */ return true; + case MSR_IA32_U_CET: + case MSR_IA32_S_CET: + case MSR_IA32_PL0_SSP ... MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB: + return true; } r = possible_passthrough_msr_slot(msr) != -ENOENT; @@ -7767,6 +7771,42 @@ static void update_intel_pt_cfg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) vmx->pt_desc.ctl_bitmask &= ~(0xfULL << (32 + i * 4)); } +static void vmx_update_intercept_for_cet_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) +{ + bool incpt; + + if (kvm_cpu_cap_has(X86_FEATURE_SHSTK)) { + incpt = !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_SHSTK); + + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_U_CET, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_S_CET, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_PL0_SSP, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_PL1_SSP, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_PL2_SSP, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_PL3_SSP, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + if (guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_LM))Looks this leading to MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB not intercepted after below steps: Step 1. User space set cpuid w/ X86_FEATURE_LM, w/ SHSTK. Step 2. User space set cpuid w/o X86_FEATURE_LM, w/o SHSTK. Then MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB won't be intercepted even w/o SHSTK on guest cpuid, will this lead to inconsistency when do rdmsr(MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB) from guest in this scenario ?
Yes, theoretically it's possible, how about changing it as below? vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB, MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt | !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_LM));
+ vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_INT_SSP_TAB, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + if (!incpt) + return; + } + + if (kvm_cpu_cap_has(X86_FEATURE_IBT)) { + incpt = !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_IBT); + + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_U_CET, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + vmx_set_intercept_for_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_S_CET, + MSR_TYPE_RW, incpt); + } +} + static void vmx_vcpu_after_set_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { struct vcpu_vmx *vmx = to_vmx(vcpu); @@ -7845,6 +7885,8 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_after_set_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) /* Refresh #PF interception to account for MAXPHYADDR changes. */ vmx_update_exception_bitmap(vcpu); + + vmx_update_intercept_for_cet_msr(vcpu); } static u64 vmx_get_perf_capabilities(void) -- 2.39.3
