From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65A6C433FE for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 04:59:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230235AbhK3FCT (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:02:19 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36532 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229524AbhK3FCR (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:02:17 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C34EC061574; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:58:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id w22so24512469ioa.1; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:58:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gtKz9hsBDu7Obb6zzumSNymu+cyQreT9aTnqVNXMp/I=; b=S9kTowrIayOMPGZVZh6Jos/AUNGX1yLqsDD4ynYktXEiNuOR5QWJpiS/gbEilaedUn CujOeUtBYCZrunm0zcUEPiJAqygbBU8vmoLQPq7ojAg8O295ClcD2DTODu/dujFM/pXw CZXfbqSIja/WY5jtozJIvlg0rOzbQTZ0jVnEl7LU4gblkezwIa7sout2zc9XLrvT62g4 nUYkdPZ/aaCb+lDZ/9sU+nHCvRWd6pAhsWQncL/vbafP88spsDLzGPgM0R1tDgdwcoZc sQV+guSQL8/vwRkgCFMmYt1ZEKo592H8RsWXwK4lR8845Juknd4agiT6s91D65q7P7/3 Vx4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gtKz9hsBDu7Obb6zzumSNymu+cyQreT9aTnqVNXMp/I=; b=7YuFDD/md9E6NY6ZwWu0keVp9ZXXtozWzJjrKKFsFGr8F0hL++MJVwXwizWfQEdL0a HOy1JgkfMiQFJcKfjIcHJ6HufRinDwBzR5lvCEQu3G4NM7pkdssfZw5xp4hHzd5GnDuV wwLRMyHc9YU167DMrqkYzsieZ6np61sSS7FjVSoGQZPZvReK54Jfczp8Mqf2m7/t+8hr KrmjWkWvpnTIyAZ+ahmw5mWoQWK5O6YjV8A09cktq/lNZ9700eEc0naxFgy+zo6SY48Q fXfSJrNbVvQ83H2MrPfb/VR7M6AjT5Npyr2fwvfOBqadc3FyU3RljhNz4yC+TMxauxlD IRlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532vKAQBwbjLiRM1VQNdGJCHMqQ/mAPGLy8+NPlY8tQKPsMYNA47 SDo3OHQlRcdaWj4nY81m6n7Pm+kdBri/37zQS2E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx14joOukbs/npCKbBGVK8YQViVPXdjEWFILXvIEaMrSHCvRU9nw1tXRwPQjixMs7U2CA/Js/GXFIpzpFQctJ0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:3303:: with SMTP id b3mr60217026ioz.45.1638248338942; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:58:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4ede5c987a4ae938a37ab7fe70d5e1d561ee97d4.1637799475.git.isaku.yamahata@intel.com> <878rxcht3g.ffs@tglx> <20211126091913.GA11523@gao-cwp> <20211129092605.GA30191@gao-cwp> In-Reply-To: <20211129092605.GA30191@gao-cwp> From: Lai Jiangshan Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:58:47 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 53/59] KVM: x86: Add a helper function to restore 4 host MSRs on exit to user space To: Chao Gao Cc: Thomas Gleixner , isaku.yamahata@intel.com, Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H . Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , Erdem Aktas , Connor Kuehl , Sean Christopherson , LKML , kvm@vger.kernel.org, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 5:16 PM Chao Gao wrote: > >I did not find the information in intel-tdx-module-1eas.pdf nor > >intel-tdx-cpu-architectural-specification.pdf. > > > >Maybe the version I downloaded is outdated. > > Hi Jiangshan, > > Please refer to Table 22.162 MSRs that may be Modified by TDH.VP.ENTER, > in section 22.2.40 TDH.VP.ENTER leaf. No file in this link: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/intel-trust-domain-extensions.html has chapter 22. > > > > >I guess that the "lazy" restoration mode is not a valid optimization. > >The SEAM module should restore it to the original value when it tries > >to reset it to architectural INIT state on exit from TDX VM to KVM > >since the SEAM module also does it via wrmsr (correct me if not). > > Correct. > > > > >If the SEAM module doesn't know "the original value" of the these > >MSRs, it would be mere an optimization to save an rdmsr in SEAM. > > Yes. Just a rdmsr is saved in TDX module at the cost of host's > restoring a MSR. If restoration (wrmsr) can be done in a lazy fashion > or even the MSR isn't used by host, some CPU cycles can be saved. But it adds overall overhead because the wrmsr in TDX module can't be skipped while the unneeded potential overhead of wrmsr is added in user return path. If TDX module restores the original MSR value, the host hypervisor doesn't need to step in. I think I'm reviewing the code without the code. It is definitely wrong design to (ab)use the host's user-return-msr mechanism. > > >But there are a lot of other ways for the host to share the values > >to SEAM in zero overhead. > > I am not sure. Looks it requests a new interface between host and TDX > module. I guess one problem is how/when to verify host's inputs in case > they are invalid. > If the requirement of "lazy restoration" is being added (not seen in the published document yet), you are changing the ABI between the host and the TDX module.