KVM/x86: Add IBPB support
commit4659554aecb0f5c43713b830a398bbb0f27d4fb1
authorAshok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Thu, 1 Feb 2018 21:59:43 +0000 (1 22:59 +0100)
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Wed, 7 Feb 2018 19:14:14 +0000 (7 11:14 -0800)
tree036b9faa4f7304a74714fdb970f938ec38608ec8
parentf13d17517fd038561019937ec598ee42bf4a1f5d
KVM/x86: Add IBPB support

commit 15d45071523d89b3fb7372e2135fbd72f6af9506

The Indirect Branch Predictor Barrier (IBPB) is an indirect branch
control mechanism. It keeps earlier branches from influencing
later ones.

Unlike IBRS and STIBP, IBPB does not define a new mode of operation.
It's a command that ensures predicted branch targets aren't used after
the barrier. Although IBRS and IBPB are enumerated by the same CPUID
enumeration, IBPB is very different.

IBPB helps mitigate against three potential attacks:

* Mitigate guests from being attacked by other guests.
  - This is addressed by issing IBPB when we do a guest switch.

* Mitigate attacks from guest/ring3->host/ring3.
  These would require a IBPB during context switch in host, or after
  VMEXIT. The host process has two ways to mitigate
  - Either it can be compiled with retpoline
  - If its going through context switch, and has set !dumpable then
    there is a IBPB in that path.
    (Tim's patch: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10192871)
  - The case where after a VMEXIT you return back to Qemu might make
    Qemu attackable from guest when Qemu isn't compiled with retpoline.
  There are issues reported when doing IBPB on every VMEXIT that resulted
  in some tsc calibration woes in guest.

* Mitigate guest/ring0->host/ring0 attacks.
  When host kernel is using retpoline it is safe against these attacks.
  If host kernel isn't using retpoline we might need to do a IBPB flush on
  every VMEXIT.

Even when using retpoline for indirect calls, in certain conditions 'ret'
can use the BTB on Skylake-era CPUs. There are other mitigations
available like RSB stuffing/clearing.

* IBPB is issued only for SVM during svm_free_vcpu().
  VMX has a vmclear and SVM doesn't.  Follow discussion here:
  https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/15/146

Please refer to the following spec for more details on the enumeration
and control.

Refer here to get documentation about mitigations.

https://software.intel.com/en-us/side-channel-security-support

[peterz: rebase and changelog rewrite]
[karahmed: - rebase
           - vmx: expose PRED_CMD if guest has it in CPUID
           - svm: only pass through IBPB if guest has it in CPUID
           - vmx: support !cpu_has_vmx_msr_bitmap()]
           - vmx: support nested]
[dwmw2: Expose CPUID bit too (AMD IBPB only for now as we lack IBRS)
        PRED_CMD is a write-only MSR]

Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@amazon.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Arjan Van De Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515720739-43819-6-git-send-email-ashok.raj@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1517522386-18410-3-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c