[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] KVM: x86/vmx: Do not skip segment attributes if unusable bit is set
On 11/14/22 17:48, Hendrik Borghorst wrote:
> When serializing and deserializing kvm_sregs, attributes of the segment
> descriptors are stored by user space. For unusable segments,
> vmx_segment_access_rights skips all attributes and sets them to 0.
> This means we zero out the DPL (Descriptor Privilege Level) for unusable
> entries.
> Unusable segments are - contrary to their name - usable in 64bit mode and
> are used by guests to for example create a linear map through the
> NULL selector.
> VMENTER checks if SS.DPL is correct depending on the CS segment type.
> For types 9 (Execute Only) and 11 (Execute Read), CS.DPL must be equal to
> SS.DPL [1].
> We have seen real world guests setting CS to a usable segment with DPL=3
> and SS to an unusable segment with DPL=3. Once we go through an sregs
> get/set cycle, SS.DPL turns to 0. This causes the virtual machine to crash
> reproducibly.
> This commit changes the attribute logic to always preserve attributes for
> unusable segments. According to [2] SS.DPL is always saved on VM exits,
> regardless of the unusable bit so user space applications should have saved
> the information on serialization correctly.
> [3] specifies that besides SS.DPL the rest of the attributes of the
> descriptors are undefined after VM entry if unusable bit is set. So, there
> should be no harm in setting them all to the previous state.
> [1] Intel SDM Vol 3C Checks on Guest Segment Registers
> [2] Intel SDM Vol 3C 27.3.2 Saving Segment Registers and Descriptor-Table
> Registers
> [3] Intel SDM Vol 3C Loading Guest Segment Registers and
> Descriptor-Table Registers
> Cc: Alexander Graf <>
> Signed-off-by: Hendrik Borghorst <>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 21 +++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Hi Hendrik,

thanks for the patch! I have queued it now for 6.2-rc6, and added Cc:

Would you mind providing a test in the form of a patch for
tools/testing/selftests/kvm? I think a kvm-unit-tests testcase would be
harder to do because there's no easy way to force



 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:51    [W:0.029 / U:2.456 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site