[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:00:51 -0800
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, He Chen <he.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@...il.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
lguest@...ts.ozlabs.org, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] KVM: VMX: Simplify segment_base
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can we use the read-only GDT here? When expanding the virtual address
>> for 64-bit system descriptors, isn't it sufficient to check (d->s == 0
>> && d->type != 0)?
>
> We can use the readonly GDT but I think doesn't matter one or the
> other here. We have to check specific types for LDT or TSS, other
> values describe other entries (cf Intel volume 3, 3.5) (for example 14
> & 15 on 64-bits are for trap & interrupt gates).
According to volume 3 of the SDM, section 3.5.2:
The following system descriptors expand to 16 bytes:
— Call gate descriptors (see Section 5.8.3.1, “IA-32e Mode Call Gates”)
— IDT gate descriptors (see Section 6.14.1, “64-Bit Mode IDT”)
— LDT and TSS descriptors (see Section 7.2.3, “TSS Descriptor in 64-bit mode”).
All legal system descriptor types (except for 0: Upper 8 bytes of an 16-byte
descriptor) should get the high 32 bits of the base address from the next 8-byte
descriptor.
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com> wrote:
>> > The KVM segment_base function is confusing. This patch replaces integers
>> > with appropriate flags, simplify constructs and add comments.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
>> > ---
>> > Based on next-20170213
>> > ---
>> > arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++--------
>> > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> > index 99167f20bc34..edb8326108dd 100644
>> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> > @@ -2062,25 +2062,35 @@ static unsigned long segment_base(u16 selector)
>> > struct desc_struct *d;
>> > unsigned long table_base;
>> > unsigned long v;
>> > + u32 high32;
>> >
>> > - if (!(selector & ~3))
>> > + if (!(selector & ~SEGMENT_RPL_MASK))
>> > return 0;
>> >
>> > - table_base = get_current_gdt_rw_vaddr();
>> > -
>> > - if (selector & 4) { /* from ldt */
>> > + /* LDT selector */
>> > + if ((selector & SEGMENT_TI_MASK) == SEGMENT_LDT) {
>> > u16 ldt_selector = kvm_read_ldt();
>> >
>> > - if (!(ldt_selector & ~3))
>> > + if (!(ldt_selector & ~SEGMENT_RPL_MASK))
>> > return 0;
>> >
>> > table_base = segment_base(ldt_selector);
>> > + } else {
>> > + table_base = get_current_gdt_rw_vaddr();
>> > }
>> > - d = (struct desc_struct *)(table_base + (selector & ~7));
>> > +
>> > + d = (struct desc_struct *)table_base + (selector >> 3);
>> > v = get_desc_base(d);
>> > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>> > - if (d->s == 0 && (d->type == 2 || d->type == 9 || d->type == 11))
>> > - v |= ((unsigned long)((struct ldttss_desc64 *)d)->base3) << 32;
>> > + /*
>> > + * Extend the virtual address if we have a system descriptor entry for
>> > + * LDT or TSS (available or busy).
>> > + */
>> > + if (d->s == 0 && (d->type == DESC_LDT || d->type == DESC_TSS ||
>> > + d->type == 11/*Busy TSS */)) {
>> > + high32 = ((struct ldttss_desc64 *)d)->base3;
>> > + v |= (u64)high32 << 32;
>> > + }
>> > #endif
>> > return v;
>> > }
>> > --
>> > 2.11.0.483.g087da7b7c-goog
>> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
