From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>,
x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com,
pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
konrad.wilk@oracle.com, peterz@infradead.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, seanjc@google.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, nik.borisov@suse.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, longman@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Set BHI_NO in guest when host is not affected by BHI
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 10:38:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d47dcc77-3c8b-4f78-954a-a64d3a905224@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <caa51938-c587-4403-a9cd-16e8b585bc13@oracle.com>
On 11/04/2024 10:33 am, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
>
>
> On 4/11/24 10:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 11/04/2024 8:24 am, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
>>> When a system is not affected by the BHI bug then KVM should
>>> configure guests with BHI_NO to ensure they won't enable any
>>> BHI mitigation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> index 984ea2089efc..f43d3c15a6b7 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> @@ -1678,6 +1678,9 @@ static u64 kvm_get_arch_capabilities(void)
>>> if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_GDS) || gds_ucode_mitigated())
>>> data |= ARCH_CAP_GDS_NO;
>>> + if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_BHI))
>>> + data |= ARCH_CAP_BHI_NO;
>>
>> This isn't true or safe.
>>
>> Linux only sets X86_BUG_BHI on a subset of affected parts.
>>
>> Skylake for example *is* affected by BHI. It's just that existing
>> mitigations are believed to suffice to mitigate BHI too.
>>
>> "you happen to be safe if you're doing something else too" doesn't
>> remotely have the same meaning as "hardware doesn't have a history based
>> predictor".
>>
>
> So you mean we can't set ARCH_CAP_BHI_NO for the guest because we
> don't know
> if the guest will run the (other) existing mitigations which are
> believed to
> suffice to mitigate BHI?
Correct.
Also, when a VM really is migrating between different CPUs, things get
far more complicated.
>
> The problem is that we can end up with a guest running extra BHI
> mitigations
> while this is not needed. Could we inform the guest that eIBRS is not
> available
> on the system so a Linux guest doesn't run with extra BHI mitigations?
Well, that's why Intel specified some MSRs at 0x5000xxxx.
Except I don't know anyone currently interested in implementing them,
and I'm still not sure if they work correctly for some of the more
complicated migration cases.
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-11 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-11 7:24 [PATCH] KVM: x86: Set BHI_NO in guest when host is not affected by BHI Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 7:34 ` Nikolay Borisov
2024-04-11 7:49 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 7:51 ` Greg KH
2024-04-11 8:00 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 7:51 ` Nikolay Borisov
2024-04-11 8:43 ` Andrew Cooper
2024-04-11 9:33 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 9:38 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2024-04-11 11:14 ` Chao Gao
2024-04-11 13:20 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-15 15:14 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-15 17:17 ` Dave Hansen
2024-04-16 8:41 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-25 20:45 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2024-04-11 13:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-11 13:32 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 14:13 ` Andrew Cooper
2024-04-11 14:33 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 14:46 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-11 15:12 ` Alexandre Chartre
2024-04-11 15:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-11 15:56 ` Chao Gao
2024-04-11 20:50 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2024-04-12 3:24 ` Chao Gao
2024-04-12 16:33 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d47dcc77-3c8b-4f78-954a-a64d3a905224@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=alexandre.chartre@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).