Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <477cc452f17665440978ae1e227861ca.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180121112224.GH2269@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1516476182-5153-1-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de>
    <1516476182-5153-5-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de>
    <20180121112224.GH2269@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Sun, 21 Jan 2018 12:04:03 -0000
Subject: Re: [RFC 04/10] x86/mm: Only flush indirect branches when switching
 into non dumpable process
From:   "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To:     "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>, hjl.tools@gmail.com
Cc:     "KarimAllah Ahmed" <karahmed@amazon.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andi Kleen" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        "Andrea Arcangeli" <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>,
        "Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        "Ashok Raj" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        "Asit Mallick" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
        "Borislav Petkov" <bp@suse.de>,
        "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        "Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "David Woodhouse" <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Janakarajan Natarajan" <janakarajan.natarajan@amd.com>,
        "Joerg Roedel" <joro@8bytes.org>,
        "Jun Nakajima" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
        "Laura Abbott" <labbott@redhat.com>,
        "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Masami Hiramatsu" <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        =?utf-8?B?IlJhZGltIEtyxI1tw6HFmSI=?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Tim Chen" <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        "Tom Lendacky" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22-21.fc27
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:22:55PM +0100, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
>> From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Flush indirect branches when switching into a process that marked
>> itself non dumpable.  This protects high value processes like gpg
>> better, without having too high performance overhead.
>
> So if I understand it right, this is only needed if the 'other'
> executable itself is susceptible to spectre. If say someone audited gpg
> for spectre-v1 and build it with retpoline, it would be safe to not
> issue the IBPB, right?


Spectre V2 not v1. V1 is separate.
For V2 retpoline is enough... as long as all the libraries have it too.

> So would it make sense to provide an ELF flag / personality thing such
> that userspace can indicate its spectre-safe?

Yes, Arjan and I were pondering that yesterday; it probably does make
sense. Also for allowing a return to userspace after vmexit, if the army
process itself is so marked.

> I realize that this is all future work, because so far auditing for v1
> is a lot of pain (we need better tools), but would it be something that
> makes sense in the longer term?

It's *only* retpoline so it isn't actually that much. Although I'm wary of
Cc'ing HJ on such thoughts because he seems to never sleep and always
respond promptly with "OK I did that... " :)

If we did systematically do this in userspace we'd probably want to do
external thunks there too, and a flag in the auxvec to tell it not to
bother (for IBRS_ALL etc.).

-- 
dwmw2