linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/12] SEV Live Migration Patchset.

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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200319161831.GA10038@ashkalra_ubuntu_server>
Date:   Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:18:31 +0000
From:   Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] SEV Live Migration Patchset.

Hello Paolo,

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 02:05:21PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 17/02/20 20:49, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> >> Also, you're making guest-side and host-side changes.  What ensures
> >> that you don't try to migrate a guest that doesn't support the
> >> hypercall for encryption state tracking?
> > This is a good question and it is still an open-ended question. There
> > are two possibilities here: guest does not have any unencrypted pages
> > (for e.g booting 32-bit) and so it does not make any hypercalls, and 
> > the other possibility is that the guest does not have support for
> > the newer hypercall.
> > 
> > In the first case, all the guest pages are then assumed to be 
> > encrypted and live migration happens as such.
> > 
> > For the second case, we have been discussing this internally,
> > and one option is to extend the KVM capabilites/feature bits to check for this ?
> 
> You could extend the hypercall to completely block live migration (e.g.
> a0=a1=~0, a2=0 to unblock or 1 to block).  The KVM_GET_PAGE_ENC_BITMAP
> ioctl can also return the blocked/unblocked state.
> 

Currently i have added a new KVM para feature
"KVM_FEATURE_SEV_LIVE_MIGRATION" to indicate host support for the SEV
live migration feature and a custom KVM MSR "MSR_KVM_SEV_LIVE_MIG_EN"
for the guest to enable SEV live migration. The MSR also has other
flags for future SEV live migration extensions.

Thanks,
Ashish