[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] x86/Xen: make use of IBPB controlling VM assist
On 17.03.2023 14:56, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 15.02.23 09:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Eventually yes. But I would prefer to sort the above question first >> (which I'm sure would have been raised by them, in perhaps more >> harsh a way), hence the initially limited exposure. > > I'd rather add _one_ hook for Xen-PV in check_bugs() just before the call > of arch_smt_update(). This can then correct any needed mitigation settings. Doing this in single central place is what I was originally hoping I could do. But that simply doesn't work (afaict): It is for a reason that I apply the adjustment in the RETBLEED_MITIGATION_IBPB case, by suppressing the setting of the feature bit. Not the least because ... > So something like (note that due to using > cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_XENPV) > DCE is happening in case CONFIG_XEN_PV isn't defined)": > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h > @@ -63,4 +63,7 @@ void __init xen_pvh_init(struct boot_params *boot_params); > void __init mem_map_via_hcall(struct boot_params *boot_params_p); > #endif > > +int __init xen_vm_assist_ibpb(bool enable); > +void __init xen_pv_fix_mitigations(void); > + > #endif /* _ASM_X86_XEN_HYPERVISOR_H */ > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c > @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ > #include <linux/pgtable.h> > #include <linux/bpf.h> > > +#include <xen/xen.h> > + > #include <asm/spec-ctrl.h> > #include <asm/cmdline.h> > #include <asm/bugs.h> > @@ -177,6 +179,9 @@ void __init check_bugs(void) > srbds_select_mitigation(); > l1d_flush_select_mitigation(); > > + if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_XENPV)) > + xen_pv_fix_mitigations(); > + > arch_smt_update(); > > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > @@ -1476,6 +1476,23 @@ static uint32_t __init xen_platform_pv(void) > return 0; > } > > +int __init xen_vm_assist_ibpb(bool enable) > +{ > + /* > + * Note that the VM-assist is a disable, so a request to enable IBPB > + * on our behalf needs to turn the functionality off (and vice versa). > + */ > + return HYPERVISOR_vm_assist(enable ? VMASST_CMD_disable > + : VMASST_CMD_enable, > + VMASST_TYPE_mode_switch_no_ibpb); > +} > + > +void __init xen_pv_fix_mitigations(void) > +{ > + if (!xen_vm_assist_ibpb(true)) > + setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_ENTRY_IBPB); ... using both setup_clear_cpu_cap() (here) and setup_force_cpu_cap() (in retbleed_select_mitigation() won't work: The latter wins, due to how apply_forced_caps() works. But of course calling both functions for the same feature is bogus anyway. In fact I think it is for a good reason that in Xen we log a message in such an event. A new helper could be introduced (and used in retbleed_select_mitigation()) to check whether a feature was previously cleared, but I did conclude that it's likely for a good reason that such doesn't exist. As to your use of cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_XENPV) and DCE - I can certainly switch to using that, which then ought allow to move xen_vm_assist_ibpb() back to enlighten_pv.c (as you have it, and as I first had it until noticing the build breakage with PVH=y and PV=n). Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |