Re: [patch 1/2] x86,module: Detect VMX modules and disable Split-Lock-Detect

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 04:16:38PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Peter Zijlstra
> > Sent: 03 April 2020 17:12
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:01:56AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 05:21:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 04:35:00PM +0200, Jessica Yu wrote:
> > 
> > > > > I wonder if it would make sense then to limit the text scans to just
> > > > > out-of-tree modules (i.e., missing the intree modinfo flag)?
> > > >
> > > > It would; didn't know there was one.
> > >
> > > Rather than scanning modules at all, what about hooking native_write_cr4()
> > > to kill SLD if CR4.VMXE is toggled on and the caller didn't increment a
> > > "sld safe" counter?
> > 
> > And then you're hoping that the module uses that and not:
> > 
> >   asm volatile ("mov %0, cr4" :: "r" (val));
> > 
> > I think I feel safer with the scanning to be fair. Also with the intree
> > hint on, we can extend the scanning for out-of-tree modules for more
> > dodgy crap we really don't want modules to do, like for example the
> > above.
> 
> Could you do the scanning in the last phase of the module build
> that has to be done against the target kernel headers and with the
> target kernel build infrastructure?

You think the binary module people care to respect our module build
warnings?