From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759542AbcILOgG (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:06 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:44977 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758860AbcILOgB (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:01 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:35:55 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Tom Lendacky Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Arnd Bergmann , Jonathan Corbet , Matt Fleming , Joerg Roedel , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Andrey Ryabinin , Ingo Molnar , Andy Lutomirski , "H. Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Alexander Potapenko , Thomas Gleixner , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 18/20] x86/kvm: Enable Secure Memory Encryption of nested page tables Message-ID: <20160912143555.26lxdu3lv3o5hjp7@pd.tnic> References: <20160822223529.29880.50884.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> <20160822223849.29880.35462.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160822223849.29880.35462.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/ (1.7.0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:38:49PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Update the KVM support to include the memory encryption mask when creating > and using nested page tables. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 ++- > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 8 ++++++-- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 3 ++- > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++- > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index 33ae3a4..c51c1cb 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -1039,7 +1039,8 @@ void kvm_mmu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm); > void kvm_mmu_uninit_vm(struct kvm *kvm); > void kvm_mmu_set_mask_ptes(u64 user_mask, u64 accessed_mask, > - u64 dirty_mask, u64 nx_mask, u64 x_mask, u64 p_mask); > + u64 dirty_mask, u64 nx_mask, u64 x_mask, u64 p_mask, > + u64 me_mask); Why do you need a separate mask? arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c::set_spte() ORs in shadow_present_mask unconditionally. So you can simply do: kvm_mmu_set_mask_ptes(PT_USER_MASK, PT_ACCESSED_MASK, PT_DIRTY_MASK, PT64_NX_MASK, 0, PT_PRESENT_MASK | sme_me_mask); and have this change much simpler. > void kvm_mmu_reset_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > index 3d4cc8cc..a7040f4 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > @@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ module_param(dbg, bool, 0644); > * PT32_LEVEL_BITS))) - 1)) > > #define PT64_PERM_MASK (PT_PRESENT_MASK | PT_WRITABLE_MASK | shadow_user_mask \ > - | shadow_x_mask | shadow_nx_mask) > + | shadow_x_mask | shadow_nx_mask | shadow_me_mask) This would be sme_me_mask, of course, like with the baremetal masks. Or am I missing something? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 18/20] x86/kvm: Enable Secure Memory Encryption of nested page tables Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:35:55 +0200 Message-ID: <20160912143555.26lxdu3lv3o5hjp7@pd.tnic> References: <20160822223529.29880.50884.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> <20160822223849.29880.35462.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160822223849.29880.35462.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Lendacky Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Arnd Bergmann , Jonathan Corbet , Matt Fleming , Joerg Roedel , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Andrey Ryabinin , Ingo Molnar , Andy Lutomirski , "H. Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Alexander Potapenko , Thomas Gleixner , Dmitry Vyukov List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:38:49PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Update the KVM support to include the memory encryption mask when creating > and using nested page tables. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 ++- > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 8 ++++++-- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 3 ++- > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++- > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index 33ae3a4..c51c1cb 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -1039,7 +1039,8 @@ void kvm_mmu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm); > void kvm_mmu_uninit_vm(struct kvm *kvm); > void kvm_mmu_set_mask_ptes(u64 user_mask, u64 accessed_mask, > - u64 dirty_mask, u64 nx_mask, u64 x_mask, u64 p_mask); > + u64 dirty_mask, u64 nx_mask, u64 x_mask, u64 p_mask, > + u64 me_mask); Why do you need a separate mask? arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c::set_spte() ORs in shadow_present_mask unconditionally. So you can simply do: kvm_mmu_set_mask_ptes(PT_USER_MASK, PT_ACCESSED_MASK, PT_DIRTY_MASK, PT64_NX_MASK, 0, PT_PRESENT_MASK | sme_me_mask); and have this change much simpler. > void kvm_mmu_reset_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > void kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > index 3d4cc8cc..a7040f4 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > @@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ module_param(dbg, bool, 0644); > * PT32_LEVEL_BITS))) - 1)) > > #define PT64_PERM_MASK (PT_PRESENT_MASK | PT_WRITABLE_MASK | shadow_user_mask \ > - | shadow_x_mask | shadow_nx_mask) > + | shadow_x_mask | shadow_nx_mask | shadow_me_mask) This would be sme_me_mask, of course, like with the baremetal masks. Or am I missing something? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.