On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 08:52:13 -0800 Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2021, Kai Huang wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > index 50810d471462..df8e338267aa 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > @@ -1570,12 +1570,18 @@ static int vmx_rtit_ctl_check(struct kvm_vcpu 
> > *vcpu, u64 data)
> >  
> >  static bool vmx_can_emulate_instruction(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void *insn, 
> > int insn_len)
> >  {
> > +   if (to_vmx(vcpu)->exit_reason.enclave_mode) {
> > +           kvm_queue_exception(vcpu, UD_VECTOR);
> 
> Rereading my own code, I think it would be a good idea to add a comment here
> explaining that injecting #UD is technically wrong, but avoids giving guest
> userspace an easy way to DoS the guest.  The EPT misconfig is a good example;
> guest userspace could have executed a simple MOV <reg>, <mem> instruction, in
> which case injecting a #UD is bizarre behavior.  But, the alternative is 
> exiting
> to userspace with KVM_INTERNAL_ERROR_EMULATION, which is all but guaranteed to
> kill the guest.
> 
> If KVM, specifically handle_emulation_failure(), ever gains a more 
> sophisticated
> mechanism for handling userspace emulation errors, this should be updated too.
> 
>       /*
>        * Emulation of instructions in SGX enclaves is impossible as RIP does
>        * not point  tthe failing instruction, and even if it did, the code
>        * stream is inaccessible.  Inject #UD instead of exiting to userspace
>        * so that guest userspace can't DoS the guest simply by triggering
>        * emulation (enclaves are CPL3 only).
>        */

Agreed. Will add above comment.

> 
> > +           return false;
> > +   }
> >     return true;
> >  }
> 
> ...
> 
> > @@ -5384,6 +5415,9 @@ static int handle_ept_misconfig(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >  {
> >     gpa_t gpa;
> >  
> > +   if (!vmx_can_emulate_instruction(vcpu, NULL, 0))
> > +           return 1;
> > +
> >     /*
> >      * A nested guest cannot optimize MMIO vmexits, because we have an
> >      * nGPA here instead of the required GPA.
> > -- 
> > 2.29.2
> > 

Reply via email to