[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200221011748.GE5713@oc0525413822.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 17:17:48 -0800
From: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@...ux.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] virtio: let virtio use DMA API when guest RAM is protected
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 03:55:14PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 05:06:06PM +0100, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > Currently the advanced guest memory protection technologies (AMD SEV,
> > powerpc secure guest technology and s390 Protected VMs) abuse the
> > VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM flag to make virtio core use the DMA API, which
> > is in turn necessary, to make IO work with guest memory protection.
> >
> > But VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM is really a
> > different beast: with virtio devices whose implementation runs on an SMP
> > CPU we are still fine with doing all the usual optimizations, it is just
> > that we need to make sure that the memory protection mechanism does not
> > get in the way. The VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM mandates more work on the
> > side of the guest (and possibly he host side as well) than we actually
> > need.
> >
> > An additional benefit of teaching the guest to make the right decision
> > (and use DMA API) on it's own is: removing the need, to mandate special
> > VM configuration for guests that may run with protection. This is
> > especially interesting for s390 as VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM pushes all
> > the virtio control structures into the first 2G of guest memory:
> > something we don't necessarily want to do per-default.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
> > Tested-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
> > Tested-by: Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> This might work for you but it's fragile, since without
> VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM hypervisor assumes it gets
> GPA's, not DMA addresses.
>
>
>
> IOW this looks like another iteration of:
>
> virtio: Support encrypted memory on powerpc secure guests
>
> which I was under the impression was abandoned as unnecessary.
It has been abondoned on powerpc. We enabled VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM;
by default, flag on powerpc.
We would like to enable secure guests on powerpc without this flag
aswell enabled, but past experience has educated us that its not a easy
path. However if Halil makes some inroads in this path for s390, we
will like to support him.
RP
Powered by blists - more mailing lists