lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2] x86,module: Detect VMX modules and disable Split-Lock-Detect
Date
> On Apr 3, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:25:55AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 06:12:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:01:56AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 05:21:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 04:35:00PM +0200, Jessica Yu wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if it would make sense then to limit the text scans to just
>>>>>> out-of-tree modules (i.e., missing the intree modinfo flag)?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would; didn't know there was one.
>>>>
>>>> Rather than scanning modules at all, what about hooking native_write_cr4()
>>>> to kill SLD if CR4.VMXE is toggled on and the caller didn't increment a
>>>> "sld safe" counter?
>>>
>>> And then you're hoping that the module uses that and not:
>>>
>>> asm volatile ("mov %0, cr4" :: "r" (val));
>>>
>>> I think I feel safer with the scanning to be fair. Also with the intree
>>> hint on, we can extend the scanning for out-of-tree modules for more
>>> dodgy crap we really don't want modules to do, like for example the
>>> above.
>>
>> Ya, that's the big uknown. But wouldn't they'd already be broken in the
>> sense that they'd corrupt the CR4 shadow? E.g. setting VMXE without
>> updating cpu_tlbstate.cr4 would result in future in-kernel writes to CR4
>> attempting to clear CR4.VMXE post-VMXON, which would #GP.
>
> Sadly the CR4 shadow is exported, so they can actually fix that up :/

I do not think that Sean’s idea would work for VMware.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-03 18:49    [W:0.151 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site