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:   Fri, 3 Apr 2020 18:12:05 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Kenneth R. Crudup" <kenny@panix.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        jannh@google.com, keescook@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] x86,module: Detect VMX modules and disable
 Split-Lock-Detect
Message-ID: <20200403161205.GT20730@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200402123258.895628824@linutronix.de>
 <20200402124205.242674296@linutronix.de>
 <bc9a0c9a-7bd0-c85d-4795-ae0b4faa5e84@prevas.dk>
 <20200403143459.GA30424@linux-8ccs>
 <20200403152158.GR20730@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200403160156.GA2701@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200403160156.GA2701@linux.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:01:56AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 05:21:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 04:35:00PM +0200, Jessica Yu wrote:

> > > I wonder if it would make sense then to limit the text scans to just
> > > out-of-tree modules (i.e., missing the intree modinfo flag)?
> > 
> > It would; didn't know there was one.
> 
> Rather than scanning modules at all, what about hooking native_write_cr4()
> to kill SLD if CR4.VMXE is toggled on and the caller didn't increment a
> "sld safe" counter?

And then you're hoping that the module uses that and not:

  asm volatile ("mov %0, cr4" :: "r" (val));

I think I feel safer with the scanning to be fair. Also with the intree
hint on, we can extend the scanning for out-of-tree modules for more
dodgy crap we really don't want modules to do, like for example the
above.