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;
Date:   Thu, 16 Jun 2022 01:52:00 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To:     tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
        dave.hansen@intel.com, luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org
Cc:     ak@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, david@redhat.com,
        hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, seanjc@google.com,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 3/3] x86/tdx: Handle load_unaligned_zeropad()
 page-cross to a shared page
Message-ID: <20220615225200.lflv4tbqus6lnj5u@black.fi.intel.com>
References: <20220614120135.14812-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220614120135.14812-4-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220614120135.14812-4-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 03:01:35PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> load_unaligned_zeropad() can lead to unwanted loads across page boundaries.
> The unwanted loads are typically harmless. But, they might be made to
> totally unrelated or even unmapped memory. load_unaligned_zeropad()
> relies on exception fixup (#PF, #GP and now #VE) to recover from these
> unwanted loads.
> 
> In TDX guests, the second page can be shared page and VMM may configure
> it to trigger #VE.
> 
> Kernel assumes that #VE on a shared page is MMIO access and tries to
> decode instruction to handle it. In case of load_unaligned_zeropad() it
> may result in confusion as it is not MMIO access.
> 
> Fix it by detecting split page MMIO accesses and fail them.
> load_unaligned_zeropad() will recover using exception fixups.
> 
> The issue was discovered by analysis. It was not triggered during the
> testing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> index 7d6d484a6d28..3bcaf2170ede 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> @@ -333,8 +333,8 @@ static bool mmio_write(int size, unsigned long addr, unsigned long val)
>  
>  static int handle_mmio(struct pt_regs *regs, struct ve_info *ve)
>  {
> +	unsigned long *reg, val, vaddr;
>  	char buffer[MAX_INSN_SIZE];
> -	unsigned long *reg, val;
>  	struct insn insn = {};
>  	enum mmio_type mmio;
>  	int size, extend_size;
> @@ -360,6 +360,19 @@ static int handle_mmio(struct pt_regs *regs, struct ve_info *ve)
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Reject EPT violation #VEs that split pages.
> +	 *
> +	 * MMIO accesses suppose to be naturally aligned and therefore never
> +	 * cross a page boundary. Seeing split page accesses indicates a bug
> +	 * or load_unaligned_zeropad() that steps into unmapped shared page.
> +	 *
> +	 * load_unaligned_zeropad() will recover using exception fixups.
> +	 */
> +	vaddr = (unsigned long)insn_get_addr_ref(&insn, regs);
> +	if (vaddr / PAGE_SIZE != (vaddr + size) / PAGE_SIZE)

Oops. I just realized it has off-by-one. It supposed to be:

	if (vaddr / PAGE_SIZE != (vaddr + size - 1) / PAGE_SIZE)

> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
>  	/* Handle writes first */
>  	switch (mmio) {
>  	case MMIO_WRITE:
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov