[PATCH v4] x86/split_lock: Sanitize userspace and guest error output

[Prarit Bhargava]

There are two problems with kernel messages in fatal mode that were found
during testing of guests and userspace programs.

The first is that no kernel message is output when the split lock detector
is triggered with a userspace program.  As a result the userspace process
dies from receiving SIGBUS with no indication to the user of what caused
the process to die.

The second problem is that only the first triggering guest causes a kernel
message to be output because the message is output with pr_warn_once().
This also results in a loss of information to the user.

While fixing these I noticed that the same message was being output
three times so I'm cleaning that up too.

Fix fatal mode output, and use consistent messages for fatal and
warn modes for both userspace and guests.

Co-developed-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: x86@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rahul Tanwar <rahul.tanwar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
v2: Do not output a message if CPL 3 Alignment Check is turned on (xiaoyao.li)
v3: refactor code (sean.j.christopherson)
v4: Fix Sign off (sean.j.christopherson)

 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 22 ++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
index 63926c94eb5f..3a373f0be674 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
@@ -1074,11 +1074,14 @@ static void split_lock_init(void)
 	split_lock_verify_msr(sld_state != sld_off);
 }
 
-static void split_lock_warn(unsigned long ip)
+static bool handle_split_lock(unsigned long ip)
 {
-	pr_warn_ratelimited("#AC: %s/%d took a split_lock trap at address: 0x%lx\n",
+	pr_warn("#AC: %s/%d took a split_lock trap at address: 0x%lx\n",
 			    current->comm, current->pid, ip);
 
+	if (sld_state != sld_warn)
+		return false;
+
 	/*
 	 * Disable the split lock detection for this task so it can make
 	 * progress and set TIF_SLD so the detection is re-enabled via
@@ -1086,18 +1089,13 @@ static void split_lock_warn(unsigned long ip)
 	 */
 	sld_update_msr(false);
 	set_tsk_thread_flag(current, TIF_SLD);
+	return true;
 }
 
 bool handle_guest_split_lock(unsigned long ip)
 {
-	if (sld_state == sld_warn) {
-		split_lock_warn(ip);
+	if (handle_split_lock(ip))
 		return true;
-	}
-
-	pr_warn_once("#AC: %s/%d %s split_lock trap at address: 0x%lx\n",
-		     current->comm, current->pid,
-		     sld_state == sld_fatal ? "fatal" : "bogus", ip);
 
 	current->thread.error_code = 0;
 	current->thread.trap_nr = X86_TRAP_AC;
@@ -1108,10 +1106,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(handle_guest_split_lock);
 
 bool handle_user_split_lock(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
 {
-	if ((regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_AC) || sld_state == sld_fatal)
+	if (regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_AC)
 		return false;
-	split_lock_warn(regs->ip);
-	return true;
+
+	return handle_split_lock(regs->ip);
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.21.3