Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <908bc121-ceb8-e296-3397-643733016ecc@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 16:49:22 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 07/14] KVM: VMX: Emulate reads and writes to CET MSRs
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        John Allen <john.allen@amd.com>
Cc:     pbonzini@redhat.com, jmattson@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
References: <20210203113421.5759-1-weijiang.yang@intel.com>
 <20210203113421.5759-8-weijiang.yang@intel.com>
 <YoUW4Oh0eRL9um5m@dell9853host> <YoUb4/iP+X+xgsfQ@google.com>
From:   "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <YoUb4/iP+X+xgsfQ@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 5/19/2022 12:16 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2022, John Allen wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 07:34:14PM +0800, Yang Weijiang wrote:
>>> +	case MSR_IA32_PL0_SSP ... MSR_IA32_PL3_SSP:
>>> +		if (!cet_is_ssp_msr_accessible(vcpu, msr_info))
>>> +			return 1;
>>> +		if ((data & GENMASK(2, 0)) || is_noncanonical_address(data, vcpu))
>> Sorry to revive this old thread. I'm working on the corresponding SVM
>> bits for shadow stack and I noticed the above check. Why isn't this
>> GENMASK(1, 0)? The *SSP MSRs should be a 4-byte aligned canonical
>> address meaning that just bits 1 and 0 should always be zero. I was
>> looking through the previous versions of the set and found that this
>> changed between versions 11 and 12, but I don't see any discussion
>> related to this on the list.
> Huh.  I'm not entirely sure what to make of the SDM's wording:
>
>    The linear address written must be aligned to 8 bytes and bits 2:0 must be 0
>    (hardware requires bits 1:0 to be 0).
>
> Looking at the rest of the CET stuff, I believe requiring 8-byte alignment is
> correct, and that the "hardware requires" blurb is trying to call out that the
> SSP stored in hardware will always be 4-byte aligned but not necessarily 8-byte
> aligned in order to play nice with 32-bit/compatibility mode.  But "base" addresses
> that come from software, e.g. via MSRs and whatnot, must always be 8-byte aligned.
Thanks Sean, I cannot agree more ;-)