diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst | 13 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst (renamed from Documentation/admin-guide/l1tf.rst) | 1 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst | 308 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst | 6 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 30 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/index.rst | 1 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/x86/conf.py | 10 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/x86/index.rst | 1 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/x86/mds.rst | 225 |
10 files changed, 592 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu index 4fb76c0e8d30..1528239f69b2 100644 --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu @@ -484,6 +484,7 @@ What: /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/spectre_v2 /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/spec_store_bypass /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/l1tf + /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mds Date: January 2018 Contact: Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Description: Information about CPU vulnerabilities @@ -496,8 +497,7 @@ Description: Information about CPU vulnerabilities "Vulnerable" CPU is affected and no mitigation in effect "Mitigation: $M" CPU is affected and mitigation $M is in effect - Details about the l1tf file can be found in - Documentation/admin-guide/l1tf.rst + See also: Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst What: /sys/devices/system/cpu/smt /sys/devices/system/cpu/smt/active diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..ffc064c1ec68 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +======================== +Hardware vulnerabilities +======================== + +This section describes CPU vulnerabilities and provides an overview of the +possible mitigations along with guidance for selecting mitigations if they +are configurable at compile, boot or run time. + +.. toctree:: + :maxdepth: 1 + + l1tf + mds diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/l1tf.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst index 9af977384168..31653a9f0e1b 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/l1tf.rst +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ The default is 'cond'. If 'l1tf=full,force' is given on the kernel command line, then 'always' is enforced and the kvm-intel.vmentry_l1d_flush module parameter is ignored and writes to the sysfs file are rejected. +.. _mitigation_selection: Mitigation selection guide -------------------------- diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..e3a796c0d3a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst @@ -0,0 +1,308 @@ +MDS - Microarchitectural Data Sampling +====================================== + +Microarchitectural Data Sampling is a hardware vulnerability which allows +unprivileged speculative access to data which is available in various CPU +internal buffers. + +Affected processors +------------------- + +This vulnerability affects a wide range of Intel processors. The +vulnerability is not present on: + + - Processors from AMD, Centaur and other non Intel vendors + + - Older processor models, where the CPU family is < 6 + + - Some Atoms (Bonnell, Saltwell, Goldmont, GoldmontPlus) + + - Intel processors which have the ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO bit set in the + IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR. + +Whether a processor is affected or not can be read out from the MDS +vulnerability file in sysfs. See :ref:`mds_sys_info`. + +Not all processors are affected by all variants of MDS, but the mitigation +is identical for all of them so the kernel treats them as a single +vulnerability. + +Related CVEs +------------ + +The following CVE entries are related to the MDS vulnerability: + + ============== ===== =================================================== + CVE-2018-12126 MSBDS Microarchitectural Store Buffer Data Sampling + CVE-2018-12130 MFBDS Microarchitectural Fill Buffer Data Sampling + CVE-2018-12127 MLPDS Microarchitectural Load Port Data Sampling + CVE-2019-11091 MDSUM Microarchitectural Data Sampling Uncacheable Memory + ============== ===== =================================================== + +Problem +------- + +When performing store, load, L1 refill operations, processors write data +into temporary microarchitectural structures (buffers). The data in the +buffer can be forwarded to load operations as an optimization. + +Under certain conditions, usually a fault/assist caused by a load +operation, data unrelated to the load memory address can be speculatively +forwarded from the buffers. Because the load operation causes a fault or +assist and its result will be discarded, the forwarded data will not cause +incorrect program execution or state changes. But a malicious operation +may be able to forward this speculative data to a disclosure gadget which +allows in turn to infer the value via a cache side channel attack. + +Because the buffers are potentially shared between Hyper-Threads cross +Hyper-Thread attacks are possible. + +Deeper technical information is available in the MDS specific x86 +architecture section: :ref:`Documentation/x86/mds.rst <mds>`. + + +Attack scenarios +---------------- + +Attacks against the MDS vulnerabilities can be mounted from malicious non +priviledged user space applications running on hosts or guest. Malicious +guest OSes can obviously mount attacks as well. + +Contrary to other speculation based vulnerabilities the MDS vulnerability +does not allow the attacker to control the memory target address. As a +consequence the attacks are purely sampling based, but as demonstrated with +the TLBleed attack samples can be postprocessed successfully. + +Web-Browsers +^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + It's unclear whether attacks through Web-Browsers are possible at + all. The exploitation through Java-Script is considered very unlikely, + but other widely used web technologies like Webassembly could possibly be + abused. + + +.. _mds_sys_info: + +MDS system information +----------------------- + +The Linux kernel provides a sysfs interface to enumerate the current MDS +status of the system: whether the system is vulnerable, and which +mitigations are active. The relevant sysfs file is: + +/sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mds + +The possible values in this file are: + + .. list-table:: + + * - 'Not affected' + - The processor is not vulnerable + * - 'Vulnerable' + - The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled + * - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode' + - The processor is vulnerable but microcode is not updated. + + The mitigation is enabled on a best effort basis. See :ref:`vmwerv` + * - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers' + - The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is + enabled. + +If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended +to the above information: + + ======================== ============================================ + 'SMT vulnerable' SMT is enabled + 'SMT mitigated' SMT is enabled and mitigated + 'SMT disabled' SMT is disabled + 'SMT Host state unknown' Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown + ======================== ============================================ + +.. _vmwerv: + +Best effort mitigation mode +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + If the processor is vulnerable, but the availability of the microcode based + mitigation mechanism is not advertised via CPUID the kernel selects a best + effort mitigation mode. This mode invokes the mitigation instructions + without a guarantee that they clear the CPU buffers. + + This is done to address virtualization scenarios where the host has the + microcode update applied, but the hypervisor is not yet updated to expose + the CPUID to the guest. If the host has updated microcode the protection + takes effect otherwise a few cpu cycles are wasted pointlessly. + + The state in the mds sysfs file reflects this situation accordingly. + + +Mitigation mechanism +------------------------- + +The kernel detects the affected CPUs and the presence of the microcode +which is required. + +If a CPU is affected and the microcode is available, then the kernel +enables the mitigation by default. The mitigation can be controlled at boot +time via a kernel command line option. See +:ref:`mds_mitigation_control_command_line`. + +.. _cpu_buffer_clear: + +CPU buffer clearing +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The mitigation for MDS clears the affected CPU buffers on return to user + space and when entering a guest. + + If SMT is enabled it also clears the buffers on idle entry when the CPU + is only affected by MSBDS and not any other MDS variant, because the + other variants cannot be protected against cross Hyper-Thread attacks. + + For CPUs which are only affected by MSBDS the user space, guest and idle + transition mitigations are sufficient and SMT is not affected. + +.. _virt_mechanism: + +Virtualization mitigation +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The protection for host to guest transition depends on the L1TF + vulnerability of the CPU: + + - CPU is affected by L1TF: + + If the L1D flush mitigation is enabled and up to date microcode is + available, the L1D flush mitigation is automatically protecting the + guest transition. + + If the L1D flush mitigation is disabled then the MDS mitigation is + invoked explicit when the host MDS mitigation is enabled. + + For details on L1TF and virtualization see: + :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <mitigation_control_kvm>`. + + - CPU is not affected by L1TF: + + CPU buffers are flushed before entering the guest when the host MDS + mitigation is enabled. + + The resulting MDS protection matrix for the host to guest transition: + + ============ ===== ============= ============ ================= + L1TF MDS VMX-L1FLUSH Host MDS MDS-State + + Don't care No Don't care N/A Not affected + + Yes Yes Disabled Off Vulnerable + + Yes Yes Disabled Full Mitigated + + Yes Yes Enabled Don't care Mitigated + + No Yes N/A Off Vulnerable + + No Yes N/A Full Mitigated + ============ ===== ============= ============ ================= + + This only covers the host to guest transition, i.e. prevents leakage from + host to guest, but does not protect the guest internally. Guests need to + have their own protections. + +.. _xeon_phi: + +XEON PHI specific considerations +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The XEON PHI processor family is affected by MSBDS which can be exploited + cross Hyper-Threads when entering idle states. Some XEON PHI variants allow + to use MWAIT in user space (Ring 3) which opens an potential attack vector + for malicious user space. The exposure can be disabled on the kernel + command line with the 'ring3mwait=disable' command line option. + + XEON PHI is not affected by the other MDS variants and MSBDS is mitigated + before the CPU enters a idle state. As XEON PHI is not affected by L1TF + either disabling SMT is not required for full protection. + +.. _mds_smt_control: + +SMT control +^^^^^^^^^^^ + + All MDS variants except MSBDS can be attacked cross Hyper-Threads. That + means on CPUs which are affected by MFBDS or MLPDS it is necessary to + disable SMT for full protection. These are most of the affected CPUs; the + exception is XEON PHI, see :ref:`xeon_phi`. + + Disabling SMT can have a significant performance impact, but the impact + depends on the type of workloads. + + See the relevant chapter in the L1TF mitigation documentation for details: + :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst <smt_control>`. + + +.. _mds_mitigation_control_command_line: + +Mitigation control on the kernel command line +--------------------------------------------- + +The kernel command line allows to control the MDS mitigations at boot +time with the option "mds=". The valid arguments for this option are: + + ============ ============================================================= + full If the CPU is vulnerable, enable all available mitigations + for the MDS vulnerability, CPU buffer clearing on exit to + userspace and when entering a VM. Idle transitions are + protected as well if SMT is enabled. + + It does not automatically disable SMT. + + full,nosmt The same as mds=full, with SMT disabled on vulnerable + CPUs. This is the complete mitigation. + + off Disables MDS mitigations completely. + + ============ ============================================================= + +Not specifying this option is equivalent to "mds=full". + + +Mitigation selection guide +-------------------------- + +1. Trusted userspace +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + If all userspace applications are from a trusted source and do not + execute untrusted code which is supplied externally, then the mitigation + can be disabled. + + +2. Virtualization with trusted guests +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The same considerations as above versus trusted user space apply. + +3. Virtualization with untrusted guests +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The protection depends on the state of the L1TF mitigations. + See :ref:`virt_mechanism`. + + If the MDS mitigation is enabled and SMT is disabled, guest to host and + guest to guest attacks are prevented. + +.. _mds_default_mitigations: + +Default mitigations +------------------- + + The kernel default mitigations for vulnerable processors are: + + - Enable CPU buffer clearing + + The kernel does not by default enforce the disabling of SMT, which leaves + SMT systems vulnerable when running untrusted code. The same rationale as + for L1TF applies. + See :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <default_mitigations>`. diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst index 5b8286fdd91b..8001917ee012 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst @@ -17,14 +17,12 @@ etc. kernel-parameters devices -This section describes CPU vulnerabilities and provides an overview of the -possible mitigations along with guidance for selecting mitigations if they -are configurable at compile, boot or run time. +This section describes CPU vulnerabilities and their mitigations. .. toctree:: :maxdepth: 1 - l1tf + hw-vuln/index Here is a set of documents aimed at users who are trying to track down problems and bugs in particular. diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt index 08df58805703..43176340c73d 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt @@ -2143,7 +2143,7 @@ Default is 'flush'. - For details see: Documentation/admin-guide/l1tf.rst + For details see: Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst l2cr= [PPC] @@ -2389,6 +2389,32 @@ Format: <first>,<last> Specifies range of consoles to be captured by the MDA. + mds= [X86,INTEL] + Control mitigation for the Micro-architectural Data + Sampling (MDS) vulnerability. + + Certain CPUs are vulnerable to an exploit against CPU + internal buffers which can forward information to a + disclosure gadget under certain conditions. + + In vulnerable processors, the speculatively + forwarded data can be used in a cache side channel + attack, to access data to which the attacker does + not have direct access. + + This parameter controls the MDS mitigation. The + options are: + + full - Enable MDS mitigation on vulnerable CPUs + full,nosmt - Enable MDS mitigation and disable + SMT on vulnerable CPUs + off - Unconditionally disable MDS mitigation + + Not specifying this option is equivalent to + mds=full. + + For details see: Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst + mem=nn[KMG] [KNL,BOOT] Force usage of a specific amount of memory Amount of memory to be used when the kernel is not able to see the whole system memory or for test. @@ -2565,6 +2591,7 @@ spec_store_bypass_disable=off [X86,PPC] ssbd=force-off [ARM64] l1tf=off [X86] + mds=off [X86] auto (default) Mitigate all CPU vulnerabilities, but leave SMT @@ -2579,6 +2606,7 @@ if needed. This is for users who always want to be fully mitigated, even if it means losing SMT. Equivalent to: l1tf=flush,nosmt [X86] + mds=full,nosmt [X86] mminit_loglevel= [KNL] When CONFIG_DEBUG_MEMORY_INIT is set, this diff --git a/Documentation/index.rst b/Documentation/index.rst index 9e01aace4f48..a7566ef62411 100644 --- a/Documentation/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/index.rst @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ implementation. x86/index sh/index + x86/index Filesystem Documentation ------------------------ diff --git a/Documentation/x86/conf.py b/Documentation/x86/conf.py new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..33c5c3142e20 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/x86/conf.py @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +# -*- coding: utf-8; mode: python -*- + +project = "X86 architecture specific documentation" + +tags.add("subproject") + +latex_documents = [ + ('index', 'x86.tex', project, + 'The kernel development community', 'manual'), +] diff --git a/Documentation/x86/index.rst b/Documentation/x86/index.rst index 73a487957fd4..ae36fc5fc649 100644 --- a/Documentation/x86/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/x86/index.rst @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ x86-specific Documentation intel_mpx amd-memory-encryption pti + mds microcode resctrl_ui usb-legacy-support diff --git a/Documentation/x86/mds.rst b/Documentation/x86/mds.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..534e9baa4e1d --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/x86/mds.rst @@ -0,0 +1,225 @@ +Microarchitectural Data Sampling (MDS) mitigation +================================================= + +.. _mds: + +Overview +-------- + +Microarchitectural Data Sampling (MDS) is a family of side channel attacks +on internal buffers in Intel CPUs. The variants are: + + - Microarchitectural Store Buffer Data Sampling (MSBDS) (CVE-2018-12126) + - Microarchitectural Fill Buffer Data Sampling (MFBDS) (CVE-2018-12130) + - Microarchitectural Load Port Data Sampling (MLPDS) (CVE-2018-12127) + - Microarchitectural Data Sampling Uncacheable Memory (MDSUM) (CVE-2019-11091) + +MSBDS leaks Store Buffer Entries which can be speculatively forwarded to a +dependent load (store-to-load forwarding) as an optimization. The forward +can also happen to a faulting or assisting load operation for a different +memory address, which can be exploited under certain conditions. Store +buffers are partitioned between Hyper-Threads so cross thread forwarding is +not possible. But if a thread enters or exits a sleep state the store +buffer is repartitioned which can expose data from one thread to the other. + +MFBDS leaks Fill Buffer Entries. Fill buffers are used internally to manage +L1 miss situations and to hold data which is returned or sent in response +to a memory or I/O operation. Fill buffers can forward data to a load +operation and also write data to the cache. When the fill buffer is +deallocated it can retain the stale data of the preceding operations which +can then be forwarded to a faulting or assisting load operation, which can +be exploited under certain conditions. Fill buffers are shared between +Hyper-Threads so cross thread leakage is possible. + +MLPDS leaks Load Port Data. Load ports are used to perform load operations +from memory or I/O. The received data is then forwarded to the register +file or a subsequent operation. In some implementations the Load Port can +contain stale data from a previous operation which can be forwarded to +faulting or assisting loads under certain conditions, which again can be +exploited eventually. Load ports are shared between Hyper-Threads so cross +thread leakage is possible. + +MDSUM is a special case of MSBDS, MFBDS and MLPDS. An uncacheable load from +memory that takes a fault or assist can leave data in a microarchitectural +structure that may later be observed using one of the same methods used by +MSBDS, MFBDS or MLPDS. + +Exposure assumptions +-------------------- + +It is assumed that attack code resides in user space or in a guest with one +exception. The rationale behind this assumption is that the code construct +needed for exploiting MDS requires: + + - to control the load to trigger a fault or assist + + - to have a disclosure gadget which exposes the speculatively accessed + data for consumption through a side channel. + + - to control the pointer through which the disclosure gadget exposes the + data + +The existence of such a construct in the kernel cannot be excluded with +100% certainty, but the complexity involved makes it extremly unlikely. + +There is one exception, which is untrusted BPF. The functionality of +untrusted BPF is limited, but it needs to be thoroughly investigated +whether it can be used to create such a construct. + + +Mitigation strategy +------------------- + +All variants have the same mitigation strategy at least for the single CPU +thread case (SMT off): Force the CPU to clear the affected buffers. + +This is achieved by using the otherwise unused and obsolete VERW +instruction in combination with a microcode update. The microcode clears +the affected CPU buffers when the VERW instruction is executed. + +For virtualization there are two ways to achieve CPU buffer +clearing. Either the modified VERW instruction or via the L1D Flush +command. The latter is issued when L1TF mitigation is enabled so the extra +VERW can be avoided. If the CPU is not affected by L1TF then VERW needs to +be issued. + +If the VERW instruction with the supplied segment selector argument is +executed on a CPU without the microcode update there is no side effect +other than a small number of pointlessly wasted CPU cycles. + +This does not protect against cross Hyper-Thread attacks except for MSBDS +which is only exploitable cross Hyper-thread when one of the Hyper-Threads +enters a C-state. + +The kernel provides a function to invoke the buffer clearing: + + mds_clear_cpu_buffers() + +The mitigation is invoked on kernel/userspace, hypervisor/guest and C-state +(idle) transitions. + +As a special quirk to address virtualization scenarios where the host has +the microcode updated, but the hypervisor does not (yet) expose the +MD_CLEAR CPUID bit to guests, the kernel issues the VERW instruction in the +hope that it might actually clear the buffers. The state is reflected +accordingly. + +According to current knowledge additional mitigations inside the kernel +itself are not required because the necessary gadgets to expose the leaked +data cannot be controlled in a way which allows exploitation from malicious +user space or VM guests. + +Kernel internal mitigation modes +-------------------------------- + + ======= ============================================================ + off Mitigation is disabled. Either the CPU is not affected or + mds=off is supplied on the kernel command line + + full Mitigation is enabled. CPU is affected and MD_CLEAR is + advertised in CPUID. + + vmwerv Mitigation is enabled. CPU is affected and MD_CLEAR is not + advertised in CPUID. That is mainly for virtualization + scenarios where the host has the updated microcode but the + hypervisor does not expose MD_CLEAR in CPUID. It's a best + effort approach without guarantee. + ======= ============================================================ + +If the CPU is affected and mds=off is not supplied on the kernel command +line then the kernel selects the appropriate mitigation mode depending on +the availability of the MD_CLEAR CPUID bit. + +Mitigation points +----------------- + +1. Return to user space +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + When transitioning from kernel to user space the CPU buffers are flushed + on affected CPUs when the mitigation is not disabled on the kernel + command line. The migitation is enabled through the static key + mds_user_clear. + + The mitigation is invoked in prepare_exit_to_usermode() which covers + most of the kernel to user space transitions. There are a few exceptions + which are not invoking prepare_exit_to_usermode() on return to user + space. These exceptions use the paranoid exit code. + + - Non Maskable Interrupt (NMI): + + Access to sensible data like keys, credentials in the NMI context is + mostly theoretical: The CPU can do prefetching or execute a + misspeculated code path and thereby fetching data which might end up + leaking through a buffer. + + But for mounting other attacks the kernel stack address of the task is + already valuable information. So in full mitigation mode, the NMI is + mitigated on the return from do_nmi() to provide almost complete + coverage. + + - Double fault (#DF): + + A double fault is usually fatal, but the ESPFIX workaround, which can + be triggered from user space through modify_ldt(2) is a recoverable + double fault. #DF uses the paranoid exit path, so explicit mitigation + in the double fault handler is required. + + - Machine Check Exception (#MC): + + Another corner case is a #MC which hits between the CPU buffer clear + invocation and the actual return to user. As this still is in kernel + space it takes the paranoid exit path which does not clear the CPU + buffers. So the #MC handler repopulates the buffers to some + extent. Machine checks are not reliably controllable and the window is + extremly small so mitigation would just tick a checkbox that this + theoretical corner case is covered. To keep the amount of special + cases small, ignore #MC. + + - Debug Exception (#DB): + + This takes the paranoid exit path only when the INT1 breakpoint is in + kernel space. #DB on a user space address takes the regular exit path, + so no extra mitigation required. + + +2. C-State transition +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + When a CPU goes idle and enters a C-State the CPU buffers need to be + cleared on affected CPUs when SMT is active. This addresses the + repartitioning of the store buffer when one of the Hyper-Threads enters + a C-State. + + When SMT is inactive, i.e. either the CPU does not support it or all + sibling threads are offline CPU buffer clearing is not required. + + The idle clearing is enabled on CPUs which are only affected by MSBDS + and not by any other MDS variant. The other MDS variants cannot be + protected against cross Hyper-Thread attacks because the Fill Buffer and + the Load Ports are shared. So on CPUs affected by other variants, the + idle clearing would be a window dressing exercise and is therefore not + activated. + + The invocation is controlled by the static key mds_idle_clear which is + switched depending on the chosen mitigation mode and the SMT state of + the system. + + The buffer clear is only invoked before entering the C-State to prevent + that stale data from the idling CPU from spilling to the Hyper-Thread + sibling after the store buffer got repartitioned and all entries are + available to the non idle sibling. + + When coming out of idle the store buffer is partitioned again so each + sibling has half of it available. The back from idle CPU could be then + speculatively exposed to contents of the sibling. The buffers are + flushed either on exit to user space or on VMENTER so malicious code + in user space or the guest cannot speculatively access them. + + The mitigation is hooked into all variants of halt()/mwait(), but does + not cover the legacy ACPI IO-Port mechanism because the ACPI idle driver + has been superseded by the intel_idle driver around 2010 and is + preferred on all affected CPUs which are expected to gain the MD_CLEAR + functionality in microcode. Aside of that the IO-Port mechanism is a + legacy interface which is only used on older systems which are either + not affected or do not receive microcode updates anymore. |