From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
To: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, brijesh.singh@amd.com,
frankja@linux.ibm.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, pair@us.ibm.com,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
cohuck@redhat.com, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/18] Refactor configuration of guest memory protection
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 01:39:22 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tuzr5ts5.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200521034304.340040-1-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Hello David,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> writes:
> A number of hardware platforms are implementing mechanisms whereby the
> hypervisor does not have unfettered access to guest memory, in order
> to mitigate the security impact of a compromised hypervisor.
>
> AMD's SEV implements this with in-cpu memory encryption, and Intel has
> its own memory encryption mechanism. POWER has an upcoming mechanism
> to accomplish this in a different way, using a new memory protection
> level plus a small trusted ultravisor. s390 also has a protected
> execution environment.
>
> The current code (committed or draft) for these features has each
> platform's version configured entirely differently. That doesn't seem
> ideal for users, or particularly for management layers.
>
> AMD SEV introduces a notionally generic machine option
> "machine-encryption", but it doesn't actually cover any cases other
> than SEV.
>
> This series is a proposal to at least partially unify configuration
> for these mechanisms, by renaming and generalizing AMD's
> "memory-encryption" property. It is replaced by a
> "guest-memory-protection" property pointing to a platform specific
> object which configures and manages the specific details.
>
> For now this series covers just AMD SEV and POWER PEF. I'm hoping it
Thank you very much for this series! Using a machine property is a nice
way of configuring this.
From an end-user perspective, `-M pseries,guest-memory-protection` in
the command line already expresses everything that QEMU needs to know,
so having to add `-object pef-guest,id=pef0` seems a bit redundant. Is
it possible to make QEMU create the pef-guest object behind the scenes
when the guest-memory-protection property is specified?
Regardless, I was able to successfuly launch POWER PEF guests using
these patches:
Tested-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
> can be extended to cover the Intel and s390 mechanisms as well,
> though.
>
> Note: I'm using the term "guest memory protection" throughout to refer
> to mechanisms like this. I don't particular like the term, it's both
> long and not really precise. If someone can think of a succinct way
> of saying "a means of protecting guest memory from a possibly
> compromised hypervisor", I'd be grateful for the suggestion.
Is "opaque guest memory" any better? It's slightly shorter, and slightly
more precise about what the main characteristic this guest property conveys.
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-04 4:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-21 3:42 [RFC v2 00/18] Refactor configuration of guest memory protection David Gibson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 01/18] target/i386: sev: Remove unused QSevGuestInfoClass David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:01 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 3:04 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 02/18] target/i386: sev: Move local structure definitions into .c file David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:03 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 3:05 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 03/18] target/i386: sev: Rename QSevGuestInfo David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:05 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 3:06 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 04/18] target/i386: sev: Embed SEVState in SevGuestState David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:09 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-04 3:15 ` David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:07 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 05/18] target/i386: sev: Partial cleanup to sev_state global David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:08 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 06/18] target/i386: sev: Remove redundant cbitpos and reduced_phys_bits fields David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:11 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 3:09 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 07/18] target/i386: sev: Remove redundant policy field David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:13 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 08/18] target/i386: sev: Remove redundant handle field David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:16 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 09/18] target/i386: sev: Unify SEVState and SevGuestState David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:13 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 3:18 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 10/18] guest memory protection: Add guest memory protection interface David Gibson
2020-05-25 10:27 ` Greg Kurz
2020-06-03 10:09 ` David Gibson
2020-06-02 1:44 ` Richard Henderson
2020-06-03 10:09 ` David Gibson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 11/18] guest memory protection: Handle memory encrption via interface David Gibson
2020-05-25 10:26 ` Greg Kurz
2020-06-04 3:27 ` David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:21 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 12/18] guest memory protection: Perform KVM init " David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:39 ` Richard Henderson
2020-06-02 3:45 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:42 ` [RFC v2 13/18] guest memory protection: Move side effect out of machine_set_memory_encryption() David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:41 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:43 ` [RFC v2 14/18] guest memory protection: Rework the "memory-encryption" property David Gibson
2020-06-02 3:54 ` Richard Henderson
2020-06-04 5:56 ` David Gibson
2020-06-04 6:19 ` Thomas Huth
2020-06-04 6:25 ` David Gibson
2020-05-21 3:43 ` [RFC v2 15/18] guest memory protection: Decouple kvm_memcrypt_*() helpers from KVM David Gibson
2020-06-02 4:13 ` Richard Henderson
2020-06-03 10:18 ` David Gibson
2020-05-21 3:43 ` [RFC v2 16/18] guest memory protection: Add Error ** to GuestMemoryProtection::kvm_init David Gibson
2020-05-29 9:16 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-06-02 4:15 ` Richard Henderson
2020-05-21 3:43 ` [RFC v2 17/18] spapr: Added PEF based guest memory protection David Gibson
2020-05-25 11:14 ` Greg Kurz
2020-05-29 7:59 ` Ram Pai
2020-06-04 3:46 ` David Gibson
2020-05-21 3:43 ` [RFC v2 18/18] guest memory protection: Alter virtio default properties for protected guests David Gibson
2020-06-05 10:45 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-05 16:04 ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-06 20:21 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-06-07 3:07 ` David Gibson
2020-06-09 10:16 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-09 15:40 ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-09 15:57 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-09 16:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-06-10 4:45 ` David Gibson
2020-06-10 4:39 ` David Gibson
2020-06-10 8:48 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-10 10:07 ` David Gibson
2020-06-10 13:21 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-29 22:19 ` [RFC v2 00/18] Refactor configuration of guest memory protection Sean Christopherson
2020-06-01 9:16 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-06-04 3:11 ` David Gibson
2020-06-04 16:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-06-04 3:05 ` David Gibson
2020-06-04 4:39 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2020-06-04 6:21 ` David Gibson
2020-06-04 21:54 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2020-06-04 22:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-06-04 23:30 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2020-06-04 23:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-06-05 20:01 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2020-06-06 8:24 ` David Gibson
2020-06-08 15:10 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2020-06-04 6:44 ` David Gibson
2020-06-04 9:08 ` Greg Kurz
2020-06-06 8:45 ` David Gibson
2020-06-05 10:55 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-06 8:44 ` David Gibson
2020-06-09 10:11 ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-10 4:36 ` David Gibson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87tuzr5ts5.fsf@morokweng.localdomain \
--to=bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pair@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).