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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: SMM fixes
To:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
References: <20210707125100.677203-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <17d26bd6-44c5-7972-fe95-544f061feb5f@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jul 2021 19:24:07 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210707125100.677203-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 07/07/21 14:50, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I did first round of testing of SMM by flooding the guest with SMIs,
> and running nested guests in it, and I found out that SMM
> breaks nested KVM due to a refactoring change
> that was done in 5.12 kernel. Fix for this is in patch 1.
> 
> I also fixed another issue I noticed in this patch which is purely
> theoretical but nevertheless should be fixed. This is patch 2.
> 
> I also propose to add (mostly for debug for now) a module param
> that can make the KVM to avoid intercepting #SMIs on SVM.
> (Intel doesn't have such intercept I think)
> The default is still to intercept #SMI so nothing is changed by
> default.
> 
> This allows to test the case in which SMI are not intercepted,
> by L1 without running Windows (which doesn't intercept #SMI).
> 
> In addition to that I found out that on bare metal, at least
> on two Zen2 machines I have, the CPU ignores SMI interception and
> never VM exits when SMI is received. As I guessed earlier
> this must have been done for security reasons.
> 
> Note that bug that I fixed in patch 1, should crash VMs very soon
> on bare metal as well, if the CPU were to honour the SMI intercept.
> as long as there are some SMIs generated while the system is running.
> 
> I tested this on bare metal by using local APIC to send SMIs
> to all real CPUs, and also used ioport 0xB2 to send SMIs.
> In both cases my system slowed to a crawl but didn't show
> any SMI vmexits (SMI intercept was enabled).
> 
> In a VM I also used ioport 0xB2 to generate a flood of SMIs,
> which allowed me to reproduce this bug (and with intercept_smi=0
> module parameter I can reproduce the bug that Vitaly fixed in
> his series as well while just running nested KVM).
> 
> Note that while doing nested migration I am still able to cause
> severe hangs of the L1 when I run the SMI stress test in L1
> and a nested VM. VM isn't fully hung but its GUI stops responding,
> and I see lots of cpu lockups errors in dmesg.
> This seems to happen regardless of #SMI interception in the L1
> (with Vitaly's patches applied of course)
> 
> Best regards,
> 	Maxim Levitsky
> 
> Maxim Levitsky (3):
>    KVM: SVM: #SMI interception must not skip the instruction
>    KVM: SVM: remove INIT intercept handler
>    KVM: SVM: add module param to control the #SMI interception
> 
>   arch/x86/kvm/svm/nested.c |  4 ++++
>   arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c    | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>   arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h    |  1 +
>   3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 

Queued, thanks.

Paolo