lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:03:27 -0500
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:     Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc:     Maran Wilson <maran.wilson@...cle.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        rkrcmar@...hat.com, JBeulich@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] KVM: x86: Allow Qemu/KVM to use PVH entry point

On 11/29/2017 03:50 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:21:59AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 28/11/17 20:34, Maran Wilson wrote:
>>> For certain applications it is desirable to rapidly boot a KVM virtual
>>> machine. In cases where legacy hardware and software support within the
>>> guest is not needed, Qemu should be able to boot directly into the
>>> uncompressed Linux kernel binary without the need to run firmware.
>>>
>>> There already exists an ABI to allow this for Xen PVH guests and the ABI is
>>> supported by Linux and FreeBSD:
>>>
>>>    https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/misc/hvmlite.html
> I would also add a link to:
>
> http://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/x86_64/include,public,arch-x86,hvm,start_info.h.html#Struct_hvm_start_info
>
>>> This PoC patch enables Qemu to use that same entry point for booting KVM
>>> guests.
>>>
>>> Even though the code is still PoC quality, I'm sending this as an RFC now
>>> since there are a number of different ways the specific implementation
>>> details can be handled. I chose a shared code path for Xen and KVM guests
>>> but could just as easily create a separate code path that is advertised by
>>> a different ELF note for KVM. There also seems to be some flexibility in
>>> how the e820 table data is passed and how (or if) it should be identified
>>> as e820 data. As a starting point, I've chosen the options that seem to
>>> result in the smallest patch with minimal to no changes required of the
>>> x86/HVM direct boot ABI.
>> I like the idea.
>>
>> I'd rather split up the different hypervisor types early and use a
>> common set of service functions instead of special casing xen_guest
>> everywhere. This would make it much easier to support the KVM PVH
>> boot without the need to configure the kernel with CONFIG_XEN.
>>
>> Another option would be to use the same boot path as with grub: set
>> the boot params in zeropage and start at startup_32.
> I think I prefer this approach since AFAICT it should allow for
> greater code share with the common boot path.

zeropage is x86/Linux-specific so we'd need some sort of firmware (like
grub) between a hypervisor and Linux to convert hvm_start_info to
bootparams.

-boris

Powered by blists - more mailing lists