Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.11] x86/pv: Fix up erroneous segments for 32bit syscall entry

[Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 09/04/18 12:46, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/04/18 11:44, Wei Liu wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:44:47AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> The existing FLAT_KERNEL_SS expands to the correct value, 0xe02b, but is the
>>> wrong constant to use.  Switch to FLAT_USER_SS32.
>>>
>>> For compat domains however, the reported values are entirely bogus.
>>> FLAT_USER_SS32 (value 0xe02b) is FLAT_RING3_CS in the 32bit ABI, while
>>> FLAT_USER_CS32 (value 0xe023) is FLAT_RING1_DS with an RPL of 3.
>>>
>>> The guests SYSCALL callback is invoked with a broken iret frame, and if left
>>> unmodified by the guest, will fail on the way back out when Xen's iret tries
>>> to load a code segment into %ss.
>>>
>>> In practice, this is only a problem for 32bit PV guests on AMD hardware, as
>>> Intel hardware doesn't permit the SYSCALL instruction outside of 64bit mode.
>>>
>>> This appears to have been broken ever since 64bit support was added to Xen,
>>> and has gone unnoticed because Linux doesn't use SYSCALL in 32bit builds.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> This wants backporting basically everywhere, and as such, also wants to be
>>> considered for 4.11 at this point.
>>> ---
>>>  xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S | 7 ++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S 
>>> b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S
>>> index 6c7fcf9..2bc046c 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S
>>> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ ENTRY(cstar_enter)
>>>          /* sti could live here when we don't switch page tables below. */
>>>          CR4_PV32_RESTORE
>>>          movq  8(%rsp),%rax /* Restore %rax. */
>>> -        movq  $FLAT_KERNEL_SS,8(%rsp)
>>> +        movq  $FLAT_USER_SS32, 8(%rsp) /* Assume a 64bit domain.  Compat 
>>> handled lower. */
>>>          pushq %r11
>>>          pushq $FLAT_USER_CS32
>>>          pushq %rcx
>>> @@ -223,6 +223,11 @@ ENTRY(cstar_enter)
>>>          movq  VCPU_domain(%rbx),%rcx
>>>          cmpb  $0,DOMAIN_is_32bit_pv(%rcx)
>>>          je    switch_to_kernel
>>> +
>>> +        /* Fix up reported %cs/%ss for compat domains. */
>>> +        movl  $0xe033, UREGS_ss(%rsp) /* Compat FLAT_RING3_SS */
>>> +        movl  $0xe02b, UREGS_cs(%rsp) /* Compat FLAT_RING3_CS */
>> I wonder if it would be better to introduce COMPAT_FLAT_RING3_* in
>> xen-x86_64.h?
>>
>> In any case, the reasoning and code looks correct to me:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> I considered that, and am open to suggestions.  The problem is that we
> don't want to put COMPAT definitions in that header file, because they
> are inapplicable to 64bit PV guests, who are intended consumers.

Add a way to include x86_32.h defining the needed COMPAT_* macros only?


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel