[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] x86: Add Kconfig option to require NX bit support



On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 03:22:20PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 01/06/2023 6:43 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S b/xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S
> > index 09bebf8635..8414266281 100644
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S
> > @@ -647,11 +653,18 @@ trampoline_setup:
> >          cpuid
> >  1:      mov     %edx, CPUINFO_FEATURE_OFFSET(X86_FEATURE_LM) + 
> > sym_esi(boot_cpu_data)
> >  
> > -        /* Check for NX. Adjust EFER setting if available. */
> > +        /*
> > +         * Check for NX:
> > +         *   - If Xen was compiled requiring it simply assert it's
> > +         *     supported. The trampoline already has the right constant.
> > +         *   - Otherwise, update the trampoline EFER mask accordingly.
> > +         */
> >          bt      $cpufeat_bit(X86_FEATURE_NX), %edx
> > -        jnc     1f
> > +        jnc     no_nx_bit
> > +#if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_REQUIRE_NX_BIT)
> >          orb     $EFER_NXE >> 8, 1 + sym_esi(trampoline_efer)
> > -1:
> > +no_nx_bit:
> > +#endif
> 
> It occurs to me...  This will prevent Xen booting in firmware
> configurations where XD-Disable is active, despite Xen having
> unconditional logic to turn XD off later in boot.
In practice setting/clearing that bit was done through a BIOS configuration
knob AFAIR, so I wouldn't be too worried about forcing it open.

> 
> Linux deals with this in verify_cpu() (early asm) along with a FMS check
> protecting the access to MSR_MISC_ENABLE, rather than using rdmsr_safe()
> and catching the #GP.
> 
On a related note, we don't use rdmsr_safe() either. We just hope it exists
on any Intel CPU. It fortunately does on any Intel CPU we care about
because it was introduced shortly before Pentium 4 (Netburst), so we're
fine since we mandate long mode.

> 
> In terms of which CPUs are a problem, we almost got very lucky.  NX is
> part of the AMD64 spec, and all AMD, VIA, Centaur and Intel Atoms have
> this property.  64bit and XD were both added midway through the Pentium
> 4 era, and appear in the Prescott E0 stepping.
> 
> However, it appears that the prior stepping, D0, had 64bit but was only
> unlocked for certain OEMs.  (At the time, Intel were still trying to
> push Itaniaum as the future, and were trying hard not to go the x86_64
> route.)
> 
> Specifically,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_processors_(NetBurst-based)#%22Nocona%22_(90_nm)
> is the suspected problem set.
> 
> 
> So, I think this does want to turn into a series, with the first patch
> moving the XD-disable logic into this path,
I agree. Will do.

> after which I think there is
> a strong case to be made for defaulting CONFIG_REQUIRE_NX to yes.
>  
> ~Andrew
A machine with long mode and no NX would be exceedingly rare, that's
for sure.

Alejandro



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.