Daniel P. Berrangé, Sep 03, 2024 at 14:24:
On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 02:16:58PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 13:29:28 +0200, Anthony Harivel wrote:
> > Daniel P. Berrangé, Sep 03, 2024 at 12:08:
> > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 03:09:42PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 17:59:47 +0200, Anthony Harivel wrote:
> > > > > Add the support in libvirt to activate the RAPL feature in
QEMU.
> > > > I suppose that the 'rapl-helper-socket' is a shared (multiple
qemu's use
> > > > it) resource set up beforehand by the admin. Right?
> > >
> > > The qemu-pr-helper could be run as a single instnce, or it could be
> > > run per-QEMU instance. The latter would give us better security
> > > isolation, for what is a privileged daemon. On the other hand, I
> > > wonder about the CPU overhead of having 100's of copies of the
> > > process running on a host.
>
> So when I was originally skimming trhough the docs I didn't properly
> understand that the reason for the helper daemon is that there was a
> security issue with accessing the measurement counters and thought it
> was strictly for performance reasons.
Yep, this is only for security reasons.
TL;DR:
"A malicious user application may use RAPL to infer confidential
information of another unprivileged application running on the same or
a different CPU core by observing the power-related behavior of the
victim application."
The answer from Intel was to put the interface being privileged
permission.
Link:
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/soft...
> > If it runs on a single instance, then the socket needs to
be chmod/chown
> > to something like qemu / libvirt group with access only to root and
> > group.
>
> Another alternative for a shared instance to be used by multiple qemu
> instances is that libvirt can open the socket and pass it to qemu, which
> avoids the potential issue at-least with DAC security labels as the
> socket can be owned by root:root with mode 600.
>
> I'm not sure how the selinux policy for that daemon looks though.
I don't believe any policy exists yet, since this is a brand new
service.
> > Running one helper instance per-QEMU instance would mean that every
> > instance read 1 MSR / Package every second. The socket is left open
> > (thanks to Daniel suggestion in QEMU review). The impact would be quite
> > low I guess on the housekeeping CPU.
> >
> > When I designed the daemon with Paolo, the first solution was the main
> > idea but I'm open to any solution that leads to a better adoption of the
> > feature.
>
> Libvirt can obviously manage also a per VM instance, which should be
> straightforward, but not as simple as this patch. This can theoretically
> also be added later, e.g. by adding a 'managed' property enabling the
> libvirt-managed daemon.
A parallel would be the qemu-pr-helper which this new service was initially
derived from in terms of archicture. It also runs privileged for security
reasons and can be single shared instance, or per-VM instance.
Which actually leads to the question to the following:
Why do I "simply" not do like the qemu-pr-helper in libvirt ?
see qemuProcessStartManagedPRDaemon() in src/qemu/qemu_process.c +2808