On Thu, 2023-12-21 at 09:02 -0500, Yang Weijiang wrote:
> Remove XFEATURE_CET_USER entry from dependency array as the entry doesn't
> reflect true dependency between CET features and the user xstate bit.
> Enable the bit in fpu_kernel_cfg.max_features when either SHSTK or IBT is
> available.
>
> Both user mode shadow stack and indirect branch tracking features depend
> on XFEATURE_CET_USER bit in XSS to automatically save/restore user mode
> xstate registers, i.e., IA32_U_CET and IA32_PL3_SSP whenever necessary.
>
> Note, the issue, i.e., CPUID only enumerates IBT but no SHSTK is resulted
> from CET KVM series which synthesizes guest CPUIDs based on userspace
> settings,in real world the case is rare. In other words, the existing
> dependency check is correct when only user mode SHSTK is available.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> index 07911532b108..f6b98693da59 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> @@ -73,7 +73,6 @@ static unsigned short xsave_cpuid_features[] __initdata = {
> [XFEATURE_PT_UNIMPLEMENTED_SO_FAR] = X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT,
> [XFEATURE_PKRU] = X86_FEATURE_OSPKE,
> [XFEATURE_PASID] = X86_FEATURE_ENQCMD,
> - [XFEATURE_CET_USER] = X86_FEATURE_SHSTK,
> [XFEATURE_XTILE_CFG] = X86_FEATURE_AMX_TILE,
> [XFEATURE_XTILE_DATA] = X86_FEATURE_AMX_TILE,
> };
> @@ -798,6 +797,14 @@ void __init fpu__init_system_xstate(unsigned int legacy_size)
> fpu_kernel_cfg.max_features &= ~BIT_ULL(i);
> }
>
> + /*
> + * CET user mode xstate bit has been cleared by above sanity check.
> + * Now pick it up if either SHSTK or IBT is available. Either feature
> + * depends on the xstate bit to save/restore user mode states.
> + */
> + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SHSTK) || boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBT))
> + fpu_kernel_cfg.max_features |= BIT_ULL(XFEATURE_CET_USER);
> +
I am still not convinced that this is not a workaround for a bug in the sanity check code,
and I don't really like this, but whatever, as long as the code works,
I don't intend to fight over this. Let it be.
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
> if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_XFD))
> fpu_kernel_cfg.max_features &= ~XFEATURE_MASK_USER_DYNAMIC;
>