Re: [PATCH Part1 v5 32/38] x86/sev: enable SEV-SNP-validated CPUID in #VC handlers

From: Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Sergio Lopez <slp@redhat.com>, Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Dov Murik <dovmurik@linux.ibm.com>,
	Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@ibm.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	tony.luck@intel.com, marcorr@google.com,
	sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Part1 v5 32/38] x86/sev: enable SEV-SNP-validated CPUID in #VC handlers
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 20:16:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210901011658.s4hgmvbptgseqcm3@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YS5XVBNrASp7Zrig@zn.tnic>

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 06:22:44PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 01:32:40PM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> > If the memory is allocated in boot/compressed/mem_encrypt.S, wouldn't
> > kernel proper still need to create a static buffer for its copy?
> 
> Just like the other variables like sme_me_mask etc that file allocates
> at the bottom. Or do you have a better idea?

What did you think of the suggestion of defining it in sev-shared.c
as a static buffer/struct as __ro_after_init? It would be nice to
declare/reserve the memory in one place. Another benefit is it doesn't
need to be exported, and could just be local with all the other
snp_cpuid* helpers that access it in sev-shared.c

> 
> > Would that be a reasonable approach for v6?
> 
> I don't like the ifdeffery one bit, TBH. I guess you should split it
> and have a boot/compressed page and a kernel proper one and keep 'em
> separate. That should make everything nice and clean at the cost of 2*4K
> which is nothing nowadays.

I think I can address the ifdeffery by splitting the boot/proper routines
into separate self-contained routines (and maybe move them out into
boot/compressed/sev.c and kernel/sev.c, respectively), then having them
just initialize the table pointer and create the copy using a common setter
function, e.g.

  snp_cpuid_table_create(cc_blob, fixup_offset)

and for boot/compressed.c fixup_offset would just be passed in as 0.

> 
> Thx.
> 
> -- 
> Regards/Gruss,
>     Boris.
> 
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpeople.kernel.org%2Ftglx%2Fnotes-about-netiquette&amp;data=04%7C01%7CMichael.Roth%40amd.com%7Cb4adf700d33e42ffe4be08d96c9b7fe6%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637660237404006013%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=nVGIpG0WAcqcHZWXK1%2BQoaPBoeCLwtkqgs8Mfgz%2Fr04%3D&amp;reserved=0