Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: fix guest-initiated crash with x2apic(CVE-2013-6376)

[Radim KrÄmÃÅ]

2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim KrÄmÃÅ wrote:
> > > >  - Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
> > > > 
> > > "only one supported cluster" comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's x2apic
> > > implementation. With 8 bit cpuid you can only address cluster 0 in logical mode.
> > 
> > One x2apic cluster has 16 cpus and we generate the x2apic LDR correctly,
> > so 8 bit cpuid can address first 16 clusters as well.
> > 
> >   u32 ldr = ((id >> 4) << 16) | (1 << (id & 0xf));
> > 
> Interrupt from a device cannot generate such ldr, only IPI can. Only
> 4 cpus in cluster zero are addressable in clustering mode by a
> device. Without irq remapping x2apic is a PV interface between host
> and guest where guest needs to know KVM implementation's limitation to
> use it.

Thanks, I'll read more about devices ... still no idea how could they
address cluster > 15.

>         I do not see a point in fixing problems in x2apic logical mode
> emulation right now since it will not make it usable, as long as
> there is not security problems there.

Agreed; I wanted to know why this patch was correct, if we cared.

> > > >    I only see we use 'struct kvm_lapic *logical_map[16][16];', which
> > > >    supports 16 clusters of 16 apics = first 256 vcpus, so if we map
> > > >    everything to logical_map[0][0:15], we would not work correctly in
> > > >    the cluster x2apic, with > 16 vcpus.
> > > > 
> > > Such config cannot work today because of 8 bit cpuid limitation. When the limitation
> > > will be removed KMV_X2APIC_CID_BITS will be set to actual number of bits we want to support.
> > 
> > Even with KMV_X2APIC_CID_BITS = 4, which would allow us to support 8 bit
> > cpuid, we would still deliver interrupts destined for cpuid > 256 to
> > potentially plugged cpus.
> Again, KMV_X2APIC_CID_BITS = 4 will not allow us to support 8 bit cpuids
> unfortunately, not sure what you mean by the second part of the sentence.

Sorry, I meant that with this change, we map all clusters to cluster 0,
which has two flaws:
 - in kvm_lapic_set_base(), the order of vcpu creation determines those
   assigned to cluster 0, and the rest is unaddressable (overwritten)
 - we can send IPI to an unplugged high cpuid and it arives in cluster 0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/