LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@amazon.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/speculation: Fill the RSB on context switch also on non-IBPB CPUs
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 23:57:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5092e2d-42c8-16ca-d164-239b0b045b51@maciej.szmigiero.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f9e5bb98-a211-c220-8a70-6febbcba371d@intel.com>
On 21.03.2018 15:05, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 03/20/2018 04:17 AM, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
>> If we run on a CPU that does not have IBPB support RSB entries from one
>> userspace process can influence 'ret' target prediction in another
>> userspace process after a context switch.
>>
>> Since it is unlikely that existing RSB entries from the previous task match
>> the new task call stack we can use the existing unconditional
>> RSB-filling-on-context-switch infrastructure to protect against such
>> userspace-to-userspace attacks.
>>
>> This patch brings a change in behavior only for the following CPU types:
>> * Intel pre-Skylake CPUs without updated microcode,
>
> The assumption thus far (good or bad) is that everything will get a
> microcode update. I actually don't know for sure if RSB manipulation is
> effective on old microcode before Skylake. I'm pretty sure it has not
> been documented publicly.
>
> How did you decide that this is an effective mitigation?
>
A RSB overwrite is already being done even on pre-Skylake Intel CPUs on
VMEXIT to protect the host from the guest, regardless of the microcode
version.
But I see that an Intel guidance document published last month about
retpolines says that "RET has this [predictable speculative] behavior on
all processors (...) microarchitecture codename Broadwell and earlier
when updated with the latest microcode".
This suggests that updated microcode may be needed for protection anyway
on such CPUs - as you say. Such update (hopefully) brings IBPB
support, too, so I agree that the change introduced by this patch can be
skipped on Intel CPUs.
Maciej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-21 22:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-20 11:17 Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-03-21 14:05 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-21 22:57 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero [this message]
2018-03-21 23:30 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-22 0:09 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-03-22 15:46 ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-23 23:11 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
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=b5092e2d-42c8-16ca-d164-239b0b045b51@maciej.szmigiero.name \
--to=mail@maciej.szmigiero.name \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=karahmed@amazon.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] x86/speculation: Fill the RSB on context switch also on non-IBPB CPUs' \
/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
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).