linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: brijesh.singh@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>,
	"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"Piotr Luc" <piotr.luc@intel.com>,
	"Tom Lendacky" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	"Fenghua Yu" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"Lu Baolu" <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
	"Reza Arbab" <arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"David Howells" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	"Matt Fleming" <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	"Laura Abbott" <labbott@redhat.com>,
	"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Eric Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@samba.org>,
	"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Dave Airlie" <airlied@redhat.com>,
	"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
	"Christoph Lameter" <cl@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 16/17] X86/KVM: Provide support to create Guest and HV shared per-CPU variables
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 11:18:42 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0810a732-9c77-a543-ffeb-7fd2d8f46266@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170829102258.gxk227js4yw47qi3@pd.tnic>

Hi Boris,

On 08/29/2017 05:22 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:

[...]

> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:07:56PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>> Some KVM specific MSR's (steal-time, asyncpf, avic_eio) allocates per-CPU
> 
> 		   MSRs
> 
>> variable at compile time and share its physical address with hypervisor.
> 
> That sentence needs changing - the MSRs don't allocate - for them gets
> allocated.
> 
>> It presents a challege when SEV is active in guest OS, when SEV is active,
>> the guest memory is encrypted with guest key hence hypervisor will not
>> able to modify the guest memory. When SEV is active, we need to clear the
>> encryption attribute (aka C-bit) of shared physical addresses so that both
>> guest and hypervisor can access the data.
> 
> This whole paragraph needs rewriting.
> 

I will improve the commit message in next rev.

[...]

>> +/* NOTE: function is marked as __ref because it is used by __init functions */
> 
> No need for that comment.
> 
> What should you look into is why do you need to call the early versions:
> 
> " * producing a warning (of course, no warning does not mean code is
>   * correct, so optimally document why the __ref is needed and why it's OK)."
> 
> And we do have the normal set_memory_decrypted() etc helpers so why
> aren't we using those?
> 

Since kvm_guest_init() is called early in the boot process hence we will not
able to use set_memory_decrypted() function. IIRC, if we try calling
set_memory_decrypted() early then we will hit a BUG_ON [1] -- mainly when it
tries to flush the caches.

[1] http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c#L167



> If you need to use the early ones too, then you probably need to
> differentiate this in the callers by passing a "bool early", which calls
> the proper flavor.
> 

Sure I can rearrange code to make it more readable and use "bool early"
parameter to differentiate it.


>> +static int __ref kvm_map_hv_shared_decrypted(void)
>> +{
>> +	static int once, ret;
>> +	int cpu;
>> +
>> +	if (once)
>> +		return ret;
> 
> So this function gets called per-CPU but you need to do this ugly "once"
> thing - i.e., global function called in a per-CPU context.
> 
> Why can't you do that mapping only on the current CPU and then
> when that function is called on the next CPU, it will do the same thing
> on that next CPU?
> 


Yes, it can be done but I remember running into issues during the CPU hot plug.
The patch uses early_set_memory_decrypted() -- which calls
kernel_physical_mapping_init() to split the large pages into smaller. IIRC, the
API did not work after the system is successfully booted. After the system is
booted we must use the set_memory_decrypted().

I was trying to avoid mixing early and no-early set_memory_decrypted() but if
feedback is: use early_set_memory_decrypted() only if its required otherwise
use set_memory_decrypted() then I can improve the logic in next rev. thanks


[...]

>> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
>> index da0be9a..52854cf 100644
>> --- a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
>> +++ b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
>> @@ -783,6 +783,9 @@
>>   	. = ALIGN(cacheline);						\
>>   	*(.data..percpu)						\
>>   	*(.data..percpu..shared_aligned)				\
>> +	. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);						\
>> +	*(.data..percpu..hv_shared)					\
>> +	. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);						\
>>   	VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__per_cpu_end) = .;
> 
> Yeah, no, you can't do that. That's adding this section unconditionally
> on *every* arch. You need to do some ifdeffery like it is done at the
> beginning of that file and have this only on the arch which supports SEV.
> 


Will do . thanks

-Brijesh

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-30 16:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-24 19:07 [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 00/17] x86: Secure Encrypted Virtualization (AMD) Brijesh Singh
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 01/17] Documentation/x86: Add AMD Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) descrption Brijesh Singh
2017-07-25  5:45   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-25 14:59     ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 02/17] x86/CPU/AMD: Add the Secure Encrypted Virtualization CPU feature Brijesh Singh
2017-07-25 10:26   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-25 14:29     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-25 14:36       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-25 14:58         ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-25 15:13           ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-25 15:29             ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-25 15:33               ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-09 18:17                 ` Tom Lendacky
2017-08-17  8:12                   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 03/17] x86/mm: Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) support Brijesh Singh
2017-07-26  4:28   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-26 16:47     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-27 13:39       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 04/17] x86/mm: Don't attempt to encrypt initrd under SEV Brijesh Singh
2017-07-26 14:44   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 05/17] x86, realmode: Don't decrypt trampoline area " Brijesh Singh
2017-07-26 16:03   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-10 13:03     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 06/17] x86/mm: Use encrypted access of boot related data with SEV Brijesh Singh
2017-07-27 13:31   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-17 18:05     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 07/17] x86/mm: Include SEV for encryption memory attribute changes Brijesh Singh
2017-07-27 14:58   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-28  8:47     ` David Laight
2017-08-17 18:21       ` Tom Lendacky
2017-08-17 18:10     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 08/17] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active Brijesh Singh
2017-07-28 10:31   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-17 18:42     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 09/17] resource: Consolidate resource walking code Brijesh Singh
2017-07-28 15:23   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-17 18:55     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-08-17 19:03       ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 10/17] resource: Provide resource struct in resource walk callback Brijesh Singh
2017-07-31  8:26   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-31 22:19   ` Kees Cook
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 11/17] x86/mm, resource: Use PAGE_KERNEL protection for ioremap of memory pages Brijesh Singh
2017-08-02  4:02   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-17 19:22     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 12/17] x86/mm: DMA support for SEV memory encryption Brijesh Singh
2017-08-07  3:48   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-17 19:35     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 13/17] x86/io: Unroll string I/O when SEV is active Brijesh Singh
2017-07-25  9:51   ` David Laight
2017-07-26 10:45     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-07-26 19:24       ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-26 19:26         ` H. Peter Anvin
2017-07-26 20:07           ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-27  7:45             ` David Laight
2017-08-22 16:52             ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-15 12:24               ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-15 14:13                 ` Brijesh Singh
2017-09-15 14:40                   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-15 14:48                     ` Brijesh Singh
2017-09-15 16:22                       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-15 16:27                         ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 14/17] x86/boot: Add early boot support when running with SEV active Brijesh Singh
2017-08-23 15:30   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-24 18:54     ` Tom Lendacky
2017-08-25 12:54       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 15/17] x86: Add support for changing memory encryption attribute in early boot Brijesh Singh
2017-08-28 10:51   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-28 11:49     ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 16/17] X86/KVM: Provide support to create Guest and HV shared per-CPU variables Brijesh Singh
2017-08-29 10:22   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-08-30 16:18     ` Brijesh Singh [this message]
2017-08-30 17:46       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-01 22:52         ` Brijesh Singh
2017-09-02  3:21           ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-09-03  2:34             ` Brijesh Singh
2017-09-04 17:05           ` Borislav Petkov
2017-09-04 17:47             ` Brijesh Singh
2017-07-24 19:07 ` [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 17/17] X86/KVM: Clear encryption attribute when SEV is active Brijesh Singh
2017-08-31 15:06   ` Borislav Petkov

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=0810a732-9c77-a543-ffeb-7fd2d8f46266@amd.com \
    --to=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=piotr.luc@intel.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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).