lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] kvm/x86: actually verify that reading MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV succeeds
From
On 3/15/23 11:16 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, Daniil Tatianin wrote:
>> ...and return KVM_MSR_RET_INVALID otherwise.
>>
>> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with the SVACE
>> static analysis tool.
>>
>> Fixes: cd28325249a1 ("KVM: VMX: support MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES as a feature MSR")
>> Signed-off-by: Daniil Tatianin <d-tatianin@yandex-team.ru>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> index 7713420abab0..7de6939fc371 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> @@ -1661,7 +1661,8 @@ static int kvm_get_msr_feature(struct kvm_msr_entry *msr)
>> msr->data = kvm_caps.supported_perf_cap;
>> break;
>> case MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV:
>> - rdmsrl_safe(msr->index, &msr->data);
>> + if (rdmsrl_safe(msr->index, &msr->data))
>> + return KVM_MSR_RET_INVALID;
>
> This is unnecessary and would arguably break KVM's ABI. KVM unconditionally emulates
> MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV in software and rdmsrl_safe() zeros the result on a fault (see
> ex_handler_msr()). '0' is a legitimate ucode revid and a reasonable fallback for
> a theoretical (virtual) CPU that doesn't support the MSR.

I see, thanks for the explanation!

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 01:02    [W:0.032 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site