Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:38:33 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20230201194604.11135-3-minipli@grsecurity.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20230201194604.11135-1-minipli@grsecurity.net> <20230201194604.11135-3-minipli@grsecurity.net>
Message-ID: <ZBI62RUnMB3ppRqO@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] KVM: VMX: Avoid retpoline call for control
 register caused exits
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 01, 2023, Mathias Krause wrote:
> Complement commit 4289d2728664 ("KVM: retpolines: x86: eliminate
> retpoline from vmx.c exit handlers") and avoid a retpoline call for
> control register accesses as well.
> 
> This speeds up guests that make heavy use of it, like grsecurity
> kernels toggling CR0.WP to implement kernel W^X.

I would rather drop this patch for VMX and instead unconditionally make CR0.WP
guest owned when TDP (EPT) is enabled, i.e. drop the module param from patch 6.

> Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> ---
> 
> Meanwhile I got my hands on a AMD system and while doing a similar change
> for SVM gives a small measurable win (1.1% faster for grsecurity guests),

Mostly out of curiosity...

Is the 1.1% roughly aligned with the gains for VMX?  If VMX sees a significantly
larger improvement, any idea why SVM doesn't benefit as much?  E.g. did you double
check that the kernel was actually using RETPOLINE?

> it would provide nothing for other guests, as the change I was testing was
> specifically targeting CR0 caused exits.
> 
> A more general approach would instead cover CR3 and, maybe, CR4 as well.
> However, that would require a lot more exit code compares, likely
> vanishing the gains in the general case. So this tweak is VMX only.

I don't think targeting on CR0 exits is a reason to not do this for SVM.  With
NPT enabled, CR3 isn't intercepted, and CR4 exits should be very rare.  If the
performance benefits are marginal (I don't have a good frame of reference for the
1.1%), then _that's_ a good reason to leave SVM alone.  But not giving CR3 and CR4
priority is a non-issue.

>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> index c788aa382611..c8198c8a9b55 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -6538,6 +6538,8 @@ static int __vmx_handle_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, fastpath_t exit_fastpath)
>  		return handle_external_interrupt(vcpu);
>  	else if (exit_reason.basic == EXIT_REASON_HLT)
>  		return kvm_emulate_halt(vcpu);
> +	else if (exit_reason.basic == EXIT_REASON_CR_ACCESS)
> +		return handle_cr(vcpu);
>  	else if (exit_reason.basic == EXIT_REASON_EPT_MISCONFIG)
>  		return handle_ept_misconfig(vcpu);
>  #endif
> -- 
> 2.39.1
>