[PATCH 1/5] KVM: rseq: Update rseq when processing NOTIFY_RESUME on xfer to KVM guest

[Sean Christopherson]

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Aug 17, 2021, at 8:12 PM, Sean Christopherson seanjc at google.com wrote:
> > @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ static int rseq_ip_fixup(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > 	 * If not nested over a rseq critical section, restart is useless.
> > 	 * Clear the rseq_cs pointer and return.
> > 	 */
> > -	if (!in_rseq_cs(ip, &rseq_cs))
> > +	if (!regs || !in_rseq_cs(ip, &rseq_cs))
> 
> I think clearing the thread's rseq_cs unconditionally here when regs is NULL
> is not the behavior we want when this is called from xfer_to_guest_mode_work.
> 
> If we have a scenario where userspace ends up calling this ioctl(KVM_RUN)
> from within a rseq c.s., we really want a CONFIG_DEBUG_RSEQ=y kernel to
> kill this application in the rseq_syscall handler when exiting back to usermode
> when the ioctl eventually returns.
> 
> However, clearing the thread's rseq_cs will prevent this from happening.
> 
> So I would favor an approach where we simply do:
> 
> if (!regs)
>      return 0;
> 
> Immediately at the beginning of rseq_ip_fixup, before getting the instruction
> pointer, so effectively skip all side-effects of the ip fixup code. Indeed, it
> is not relevant to do any fixup here, because it is nested in a ioctl system
> call.
> 
> Effectively, this would preserve the SIGSEGV behavior when this ioctl is
> erroneously called by user-space from a rseq critical section.

Ha, that's effectively what I implemented first, but I changed it because of the
comment in clear_rseq_cs() that says:

  The rseq_cs field is set to NULL on preemption or signal delivery ... as well
  as well as on top of code outside of the rseq assembly block.

Which makes it sound like something might rely on clearing rseq_cs?

Ah, or is it the case that rseq_cs is non-NULL if and only if userspace is in an
rseq critical section, and because syscalls in critical sections are illegal, by
definition clearing rseq_cs is a nop unless userspace is misbehaving.

If that's true, what about explicitly checking that at NOTIFY_RESUME?  Or is it
not worth the extra code to detect an error that will likely be caught anyways?

diff --git a/kernel/rseq.c b/kernel/rseq.c
index 35f7bd0fced0..28b8342290b0 100644
--- a/kernel/rseq.c
+++ b/kernel/rseq.c
@@ -282,6 +282,13 @@ void __rseq_handle_notify_resume(struct ksignal *ksig, struct pt_regs *regs)

        if (unlikely(t->flags & PF_EXITING))
                return;
+       if (!regs) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_RSEQ
+               if (t->rseq && rseq_get_rseq_cs(t, &rseq_cs))
+                       goto error;
+#endif
+               return;
+       }
        ret = rseq_ip_fixup(regs);
        if (unlikely(ret < 0))
                goto error;

> Thanks for looking into this !
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> > 		return clear_rseq_cs(t);
> > 	ret = rseq_need_restart(t, rseq_cs.flags);
> > 	if (ret <= 0)
> > --
> > 2.33.0.rc1.237.g0d66db33f3-goog
> 
> -- 
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com