arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Currently, when a Secure TSC enabled SNP guest attempts to write to the
intercepted GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR (a read-only MSR), the guest kernel response
incorrectly implies a VMM configuration error, when in fact it is the usual
VMM configuration to intercept writes to read-only MSRs, unless explicitly
documented.
Modify the intercepted TSC MSR #VC handling:
* Write to GUEST_TSC_FREQ will generate a #GP instead of terminating the
guest
* Write to MSR_IA32_TSC will generate a #GP instead of silently ignoring it
Add a WARN_ONCE to log the incident, as well-behaved SNP guest kernels
should never attempt to write to these MSRs.
However, continue to terminate the guest when reading from intercepted
GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR with Secure TSC enabled, as intercepted reads indicate
an improper VMM configuration for Secure TSC enabled SNP guests.
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Co-developed-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com>
---
arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c
index faf1fce89ed4..18be9f8bd015 100644
--- a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c
+++ b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c
@@ -371,29 +371,30 @@ static enum es_result __vc_handle_msr_caa(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write)
* executing with Secure TSC enabled, so special handling is required for
* accesses of MSR_IA32_TSC and MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ.
*/
-static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write)
+static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write,
+ struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt)
{
u64 tsc;
/*
- * GUEST_TSC_FREQ should not be intercepted when Secure TSC is enabled.
- * Terminate the SNP guest when the interception is enabled.
+ * Writing to MSR_IA32_TSC can cause subsequent reads of the TSC to
+ * return undefined values, and GUEST_TSC_FREQ is read-only. Generate
+ * a #GP on all writes, but WARN to log a kernel bug.
*/
- if (regs->cx == MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ)
- return ES_VMM_ERROR;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(write)) {
+ ctxt->fi.vector = X86_TRAP_GP;
+ ctxt->fi.error_code = 0;
+ return ES_EXCEPTION;
+ }
/*
- * Writes: Writing to MSR_IA32_TSC can cause subsequent reads of the TSC
- * to return undefined values, so ignore all writes.
- *
- * Reads: Reads of MSR_IA32_TSC should return the current TSC value, use
- * the value returned by rdtsc_ordered().
+ * GUEST_TSC_FREQ read should not be intercepted when Secure TSC is
+ * enabled. Terminate the SNP guest when the interception is enabled.
*/
- if (write) {
- WARN_ONCE(1, "TSC MSR writes are verboten!\n");
- return ES_OK;
- }
+ if (regs->cx == MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ)
+ return ES_VMM_ERROR;
+ /* Reads of MSR_IA32_TSC should return the current TSC value. */
tsc = rdtsc_ordered();
regs->ax = lower_32_bits(tsc);
regs->dx = upper_32_bits(tsc);
@@ -416,7 +417,7 @@ static enum es_result vc_handle_msr(struct ghcb *ghcb, struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt)
case MSR_IA32_TSC:
case MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ:
if (sev_status & MSR_AMD64_SNP_SECURE_TSC)
- return __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(regs, write);
+ return __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(regs, write, ctxt);
break;
default:
break;
base-commit: 9f4a425223f3bd8ccaebc7f4f42b1d8c5f12fb45
--
2.43.0
On 7/16/25 00:53, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: > From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> > > Currently, when a Secure TSC enabled SNP guest attempts to write to the > intercepted GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR (a read-only MSR), the guest kernel response > incorrectly implies a VMM configuration error, when in fact it is the usual > VMM configuration to intercept writes to read-only MSRs, unless explicitly > documented. > > Modify the intercepted TSC MSR #VC handling: > * Write to GUEST_TSC_FREQ will generate a #GP instead of terminating the > guest > * Write to MSR_IA32_TSC will generate a #GP instead of silently ignoring it > > Add a WARN_ONCE to log the incident, as well-behaved SNP guest kernels > should never attempt to write to these MSRs. > > However, continue to terminate the guest when reading from intercepted > GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR with Secure TSC enabled, as intercepted reads indicate > an improper VMM configuration for Secure TSC enabled SNP guests. > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> > Co-developed-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com> > Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com> > --- > arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c > index faf1fce89ed4..18be9f8bd015 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c > +++ b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c > @@ -371,29 +371,30 @@ static enum es_result __vc_handle_msr_caa(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write) > * executing with Secure TSC enabled, so special handling is required for > * accesses of MSR_IA32_TSC and MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ. > */ > -static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write) > +static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write, > + struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt) The pt_regs pointer is part of the es_em_ctxt struct, so probably just change this to: static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt, bool write) and then get the regs pointer from ctxt: struct pt_regs *regs = ctxt->regs; > { > u64 tsc; > > /* > - * GUEST_TSC_FREQ should not be intercepted when Secure TSC is enabled. > - * Terminate the SNP guest when the interception is enabled. > + * Writing to MSR_IA32_TSC can cause subsequent reads of the TSC to > + * return undefined values, and GUEST_TSC_FREQ is read-only. Generate > + * a #GP on all writes, but WARN to log a kernel bug. > */ > - if (regs->cx == MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ) > - return ES_VMM_ERROR; > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(write)) { Do we want to capture individual WARNs for each MSR? I guess I'm ok with a single WARN for either MSR, but just asking the question. Thanks, Tom > + ctxt->fi.vector = X86_TRAP_GP; > + ctxt->fi.error_code = 0; > + return ES_EXCEPTION; > + } > > /* > - * Writes: Writing to MSR_IA32_TSC can cause subsequent reads of the TSC > - * to return undefined values, so ignore all writes. > - * > - * Reads: Reads of MSR_IA32_TSC should return the current TSC value, use > - * the value returned by rdtsc_ordered(). > + * GUEST_TSC_FREQ read should not be intercepted when Secure TSC is > + * enabled. Terminate the SNP guest when the interception is enabled. > */ > - if (write) { > - WARN_ONCE(1, "TSC MSR writes are verboten!\n"); > - return ES_OK; > - } > + if (regs->cx == MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ) > + return ES_VMM_ERROR; > > + /* Reads of MSR_IA32_TSC should return the current TSC value. */ > tsc = rdtsc_ordered(); > regs->ax = lower_32_bits(tsc); > regs->dx = upper_32_bits(tsc); > @@ -416,7 +417,7 @@ static enum es_result vc_handle_msr(struct ghcb *ghcb, struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt) > case MSR_IA32_TSC: > case MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ: > if (sev_status & MSR_AMD64_SNP_SECURE_TSC) > - return __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(regs, write); > + return __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(regs, write, ctxt); > break; > default: > break; > > base-commit: 9f4a425223f3bd8ccaebc7f4f42b1d8c5f12fb45
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 7/16/25 00:53, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: > > From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> > > > > Currently, when a Secure TSC enabled SNP guest attempts to write to the > > intercepted GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR (a read-only MSR), the guest kernel response > > incorrectly implies a VMM configuration error, when in fact it is the usual > > VMM configuration to intercept writes to read-only MSRs, unless explicitly > > documented. > > > > Modify the intercepted TSC MSR #VC handling: > > * Write to GUEST_TSC_FREQ will generate a #GP instead of terminating the > > guest > > * Write to MSR_IA32_TSC will generate a #GP instead of silently ignoring it > > > > Add a WARN_ONCE to log the incident, as well-behaved SNP guest kernels > > should never attempt to write to these MSRs. > > > > However, continue to terminate the guest when reading from intercepted > > GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR with Secure TSC enabled, as intercepted reads indicate > > an improper VMM configuration for Secure TSC enabled SNP guests. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> Feel free to drop me as author and just give me a Reported-by or Suggested-by. At this point, I ain't doing a whole lot of anything for this patch :-) > > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(write)) { > > Do we want to capture individual WARNs for each MSR? I guess I'm ok with > a single WARN for either MSR, but just asking the question. Or don't WARN at all. If the caller is doing a bare wrmsrq(), then the kernel will WARN in ex_handler_msr(). If the caller is doing wrmsrq_safe(), do we care that they're being deliberately weird?
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2025, Tom Lendacky wrote: >> On 7/16/25 00:53, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: >> > From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> >> > >> > Currently, when a Secure TSC enabled SNP guest attempts to write to the >> > intercepted GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR (a read-only MSR), the guest kernel response >> > incorrectly implies a VMM configuration error, when in fact it is the usual >> > VMM configuration to intercept writes to read-only MSRs, unless explicitly >> > documented. >> > >> > Modify the intercepted TSC MSR #VC handling: >> > * Write to GUEST_TSC_FREQ will generate a #GP instead of terminating the >> > guest >> > * Write to MSR_IA32_TSC will generate a #GP instead of silently ignoring it >> > >> > Add a WARN_ONCE to log the incident, as well-behaved SNP guest kernels >> > should never attempt to write to these MSRs. >> > >> > However, continue to terminate the guest when reading from intercepted >> > GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR with Secure TSC enabled, as intercepted reads indicate >> > an improper VMM configuration for Secure TSC enabled SNP guests. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> > > Feel free to drop me as author and just give me a Reported-by or Suggested-by. > At this point, I ain't doing a whole lot of anything for this patch :-) Sure > >> > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(write)) { >> >> Do we want to capture individual WARNs for each MSR? I guess I'm ok with >> a single WARN for either MSR, but just asking the question. > > Or don't WARN at all. If the caller is doing a bare wrmsrq(), then the kernel > will WARN in ex_handler_msr(). If the caller is doing wrmsrq_safe(), do we care > that they're being deliberately weird? Agree, we can drop the WARN. Regards, Nikunj
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> writes: > On 7/16/25 00:53, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: >> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> >> >> Currently, when a Secure TSC enabled SNP guest attempts to write to the >> intercepted GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR (a read-only MSR), the guest kernel response >> incorrectly implies a VMM configuration error, when in fact it is the usual >> VMM configuration to intercept writes to read-only MSRs, unless explicitly >> documented. >> >> Modify the intercepted TSC MSR #VC handling: >> * Write to GUEST_TSC_FREQ will generate a #GP instead of terminating the >> guest >> * Write to MSR_IA32_TSC will generate a #GP instead of silently ignoring it >> >> Add a WARN_ONCE to log the incident, as well-behaved SNP guest kernels >> should never attempt to write to these MSRs. >> >> However, continue to terminate the guest when reading from intercepted >> GUEST_TSC_FREQ MSR with Secure TSC enabled, as intercepted reads indicate >> an improper VMM configuration for Secure TSC enabled SNP guests. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> >> Co-developed-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com> >> Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com> >> --- >> arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c >> index faf1fce89ed4..18be9f8bd015 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/coco/sev/vc-handle.c >> @@ -371,29 +371,30 @@ static enum es_result __vc_handle_msr_caa(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write) >> * executing with Secure TSC enabled, so special handling is required for >> * accesses of MSR_IA32_TSC and MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ. >> */ >> -static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write) >> +static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct pt_regs *regs, bool write, >> + struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt) > > The pt_regs pointer is part of the es_em_ctxt struct, so probably just > change this to: > > static enum es_result __vc_handle_secure_tsc_msrs(struct es_em_ctxt *ctxt, bool write) > > and then get the regs pointer from ctxt: > > struct pt_regs *regs = ctxt->regs; Ack > >> { >> u64 tsc; >> >> /* >> - * GUEST_TSC_FREQ should not be intercepted when Secure TSC is enabled. >> - * Terminate the SNP guest when the interception is enabled. >> + * Writing to MSR_IA32_TSC can cause subsequent reads of the TSC to >> + * return undefined values, and GUEST_TSC_FREQ is read-only. Generate >> + * a #GP on all writes, but WARN to log a kernel bug. >> */ >> - if (regs->cx == MSR_AMD64_GUEST_TSC_FREQ) >> - return ES_VMM_ERROR; >> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(write)) { > > Do we want to capture individual WARNs for each MSR? I guess I'm ok with > a single WARN for either MSR, but just asking the question. Right, I had thought about this and concluded that a single WARN should be fine. The chance of both the MSR being intercepted and written are pretty low, and anyways a GP# will be generate for all the writes. Regards, Nikunj
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.