Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/vPMU: Forbid writing to MSR_F15H_PERF MSRs
 when guest doesn't have X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE
In-Reply-To: <a40090f1-23a1-fca0-3105-b5e48ee5c86e@redhat.com>
References: <20210323084515.1346540-1-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <a40090f1-23a1-fca0-3105-b5e48ee5c86e@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Mar 2021 10:52:51 +0200
Message-ID: <874kgubau4.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 23/03/21 09:45, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0-5, MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0-5 MSRs are only available when
>> X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE CPUID bit was exposed to the guest. KVM, however,
>> allows these MSRs unconditionally because kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr() ->
>> amd_msr_idx_to_pmc() check always passes and because kvm_pmu_set_msr() ->
>> amd_pmu_set_msr() doesn't fail.
>> 
>> In case of a counter (CTRn), no big harm is done as we only increase
>> internal PMC's value but in case of an eventsel (CTLn), we go deep into
>> perf internals with a non-existing counter.
>> 
>> Note, kvm_get_msr_common() just returns '0' when these MSRs don't exist
>> and this also seems to contradict architectural behavior which is #GP
>> (I did check one old Opteron host) but changing this status quo is a bit
>> scarier.
>
> Hmm, since these do have a cpuid bit it may not be that scary.

Well, if you're not scared I can send a patch)

-- 
Vitaly