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;
Date:   Thu, 19 Dec 2019 13:49:48 -0600
From:   John Allen <john.allen@amd.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm/svm: PKU not currently supported
Message-ID: <20191219194948.adug277luzjdu3qv@mojo.amd.com>
References: <20191219152332.28857-1-john.allen@amd.com>
 <87immc873u.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87immc873u.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: amd.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9f531fd1-14e4-4bbf-62e3-08d784bc9e53
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2019 19:49:54.4955
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: x/sRurtDKoLeDJYn/WMxOgWclijHLqDNrG7sKAexzPPN0FBSYB/Xov350pjyxzOoSdZz1m2TimKqBxPIhcWSPQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR12MB1596
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 08:09:57PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> John Allen <john.allen@amd.com> writes:
> 
> > Current SVM implementation does not have support for handling PKU. Guests
> > running on a host with future AMD cpus that support the feature will read
> > garbage from the PKRU register and will hit segmentation faults on boot as
> > memory is getting marked as protected that should not be. Ensure that cpuid
> > from SVM does not advertise the feature.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Allen <john.allen@amd.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > index 122d4ce3b1ab..f911aa1b41c8 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > @@ -5933,6 +5933,8 @@ static void svm_set_supported_cpuid(u32 func, struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry)
> >  		if (avic)
> >  			entry->ecx &= ~bit(X86_FEATURE_X2APIC);
> >  		break;
> > +	case 0x7:
> > +		entry->ecx &= ~bit(X86_FEATURE_PKU);
> 
> Would it make more sense to introduce kvm_x86_ops->pku_supported() (and
> return false for SVM and boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PKU) for vmx) so we
> don't set the bit in the first place?

Yes, I think you're right. I had initially planned to do it that way so I
already have a patch ready. I'll send it up pronto.

> 
> >  	case 0x80000001:
> >  		if (nested)
> >  			entry->ecx |= (1 << 2); /* Set SVM bit */
> 
> -- 
> Vitaly
>