On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 12:26:38PM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> > > SGX architecture introduced a new instruction called EUPDATESVN [1]
> > > to Ice Lake. It allows updating security SVN version, given that EPC
> > > is completely empty. The latter is required for security reasons
> > > in order to reason that enclave security posture is as secure as the
> > > security SVN version of the TCB that created it.
> > >
> > > Additionally it is important to ensure that while ENCLS[EUPDATESVN]
> > > runs, no concurrent page creation happens in EPC, because it might
> > > result in #GP delivered to the creator. Legacy SW might not be prepared
> > > to handle such unexpected #GPs and therefore this patch introduces
> > > a locking mechanism to ensure no concurrent EPC allocations can happen.
> > >
> > > It is also ensured that ENCLS[EUPDATESVN] is not called when running
> > > in a VM since it does not have a meaning in this context (microcode
> > > updates application is limited to the host OS) and will create
> > > unnecessary load.
> > >
> > > The implementation of ENCLS[EUPDATESVN] is based on previous
> > submision in [2]
> > >
> > > [1] https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/648682?explicitVersion=true
> >
> > I don't think for Intel opcodes a link is needed. We know where to look
> > them up.
>
> Ok, I can drop this reference. It is just a whitepaper explaining to readers
> the background and operation of EUPDATESVN. It is not part of standard
> SDM, so I thought I would put a link.
>
>
> >
> > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220520103904.1216-1-
> > cathy.zh...@intel.com/T/#medb89e6a916337b4f9e68c736a295ba0ae99ac90
> >
> > Link:
>
> ? Not sure what you mean by it.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Co-developed-by: Cathy Zhang <cathy.zh...@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Cathy Zhang <cathy.zh...@intel.com>
> > > Co-developed-by: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshet...@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshet...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h | 33 +++++++++--------
> > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h | 6 +++
> > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 65
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h | 2 +
> > > 4 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
> > > index 8ba39bbf4e91..5caf5c31ebc6 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
> > > @@ -26,23 +26,26 @@
> > > #define SGX_CPUID_EPC_SECTION 0x1
> > > /* The bitmask for the EPC section type. */
> > > #define SGX_CPUID_EPC_MASK GENMASK(3, 0)
> > > +/* EUPDATESVN presence indication */
> > > +#define SGX_CPUID_EUPDATESVN BIT(10)
> > >
> > > enum sgx_encls_function {
> > > - ECREATE = 0x00,
> > > - EADD = 0x01,
> > > - EINIT = 0x02,
> > > - EREMOVE = 0x03,
> > > - EDGBRD = 0x04,
> > > - EDGBWR = 0x05,
> > > - EEXTEND = 0x06,
> > > - ELDU = 0x08,
> > > - EBLOCK = 0x09,
> > > - EPA = 0x0A,
> > > - EWB = 0x0B,
> > > - ETRACK = 0x0C,
> > > - EAUG = 0x0D,
> > > - EMODPR = 0x0E,
> > > - EMODT = 0x0F,
> > > + ECREATE = 0x00,
> > > + EADD = 0x01,
> > > + EINIT = 0x02,
> > > + EREMOVE = 0x03,
> > > + EDGBRD = 0x04,
> > > + EDGBWR = 0x05,
> > > + EEXTEND = 0x06,
> > > + ELDU = 0x08,
> > > + EBLOCK = 0x09,
> > > + EPA = 0x0A,
> > > + EWB = 0x0B,
> > > + ETRACK = 0x0C,
> > > + EAUG = 0x0D,
> > > + EMODPR = 0x0E,
> > > + EMODT = 0x0F,
> > > + EUPDATESVN = 0x18,
> > > };
> > >
> > > /**
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h
> > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h
> > > index 99004b02e2ed..3d83c76dc91f 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h
> > > @@ -233,4 +233,10 @@ static inline int __eaug(struct sgx_pageinfo *pginfo,
> > void *addr)
> > > return __encls_2(EAUG, pginfo, addr);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/* Update CPUSVN at runtime. */
> > > +static inline int __eupdatesvn(void)
> > > +{
> > > + return __encls_ret_1(EUPDATESVN, "");
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > #endif /* _X86_ENCLS_H */
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> > > index b61d3bad0446..698921229094 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> > > @@ -32,6 +32,11 @@ static DEFINE_XARRAY(sgx_epc_address_space);
> > > static LIST_HEAD(sgx_active_page_list);
> > > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(sgx_reclaimer_lock);
> > >
> > > +/* This lock is held to prevent new EPC pages from being created
> > > + * during the execution of ENCLS[EUPDATESVN].
> > > + */
> > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(sgx_epc_eupdatesvn_lock);
> > > +
> > > static atomic_long_t sgx_nr_used_pages = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0);
> > > static unsigned long sgx_nr_total_pages;
> > >
> > > @@ -457,7 +462,17 @@ static struct sgx_epc_page
> > *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node(int nid)
> > > page->flags = 0;
> > >
> > > spin_unlock(&node->lock);
> > > - atomic_long_inc(&sgx_nr_used_pages);
> > > +
> > > + if (!atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&sgx_nr_used_pages)) {
> > > + spin_lock(&sgx_epc_eupdatesvn_lock);
> > > + /* Only call sgx_updatesvn() once the first enclave's
> > > + * page is allocated from EPC
> > > + */
> > > + if (atomic_long_read(&sgx_nr_used_pages) == 0)
> > > + sgx_updatesvn();
> > > + atomic_long_inc(&sgx_nr_used_pages);
> > > + spin_unlock(&sgx_epc_eupdatesvn_lock);
> > > + }
> > >
> > > return page;
> > > }
> > > @@ -970,3 +985,51 @@ static int __init sgx_init(void)
> > > }
> > >
> > > device_initcall(sgx_init);
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * sgx_updatesvn() - Issue ENCLS[EUPDATESVN]
> > > + * If EPC is ready, this instruction will update CPUSVN to the currently
> > > + * loaded microcode update SVN and generate new cryptographic assets.
> > > + */
> > > +void sgx_updatesvn(void)
> > > +{
> > > + int ret;
> > > + int retry = 10;
> >
> > Reverse declaration order.
>
> Sure, will fix.
>
> >
> > > +
> > > + lockdep_assert_held(&sgx_epc_eupdatesvn_lock);
> > > +
> > > + /* Do not execute EUPDATESVN if instruction is unavalible or running
> > in a VM */
> > > + if (!(cpuid_eax(SGX_CPUID) & SGX_CPUID_EUPDATESVN) ||
> > > + boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
> > > + return;
> >
> >
> > if (!(cpuid_eax(SGX_CPUID) & SGX_CPUID_EUPDATESVN))
> > return;
> >
> > /* ... */
> > if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
> > return;
> >
> > The first check really does not need a comment. The second would benefit
> > from explaining why bail out inside a VM.
>
> Sure, I can change. The reason why we dont want the execution in a VM is
> explained
> in the commit message, I can duplicate it in the code comment also.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > +
> > > + do {
> > > + ret = __eupdatesvn();
> > > + if (ret != SGX_INSUFFICIENT_ENTROPY)
> > > + break;
> > > +
> > > + } while (--retry);
> > > +
> > > + switch (ret) {
> > > + case 0:
> > > + pr_debug("EUPDATESVN was successful!\n");
> > > + break;
This is at least definite removal. We don't log for zero codes.
> > > + case SGX_NO_UPDATE:
> > > + pr_debug("EUPDATESVN was successful, but CPUSVN was not
> > updated, "
> > > + "because current SVN was not newer than
> > CPUSVN.\n");
> > > + break;
> > > + case SGX_EPC_NOT_READY:
> > > + pr_debug("EPC is not ready for SVN update.");
> > > + break;
> > > + case SGX_INSUFFICIENT_ENTROPY:
> > > + pr_debug("CPUSVN update is failed due to Insufficient
> > entropy in RNG, "
> > > + "please try it later.\n");
> > > + break;
> > > + case SGX_EPC_PAGE_CONFLICT:
> > > + pr_debug("CPUSVN update is failed due to concurrency
> > violation, please "
> > > + "stop running any other ENCLS leaf and try it
> > later.\n");
> > > + break;
> > > + default:
> > > + break;
> >
> > Remove pr_debug() statements.
>
> This I am not sure it is good idea. I think it would be useful for system
> admins to have a way to see that update either happened or not.
> It is true that you can find this out by requesting a new SGX attestation
> quote (and see if newer SVN is used), but it is not the faster way.
Maybe pr_debug() is them wrong level if they are meant for sysadmins?
I mean these should not happen in normal behavior like ever? As
pr_debug() I don't really grab this.
>
>
>
> >
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h
> > > index d2dad21259a8..92c9e226f1b5 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h
> > > @@ -104,4 +104,6 @@ static inline int __init sgx_vepc_init(void)
> > >
> > > void sgx_update_lepubkeyhash(u64 *lepubkeyhash);
> > >
> >
> > I don't think we need a newline in-between.
>
> Sure, will fix.
>
> Thank you very much for your prompt review Jarkko!
NP, despite all the complains this are really just minor details
that we need to nail :-) I'm sure we get them right within round
or two...
>
> Best Regards,
> Elena.
BR, Jarkko
