[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0a9c6485-74d8-e0fc-d261-097380272e07@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 09:50:48 -0700
From: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
James E J Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter H Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/16] x86/kvm: Use bounce buffers for TD guest
On 10/20/21 9:39 AM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> On 10/8/21 7:37 PM, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> Intel TDX doesn't allow VMM to directly access guest private memory.
>> Any memory that is required for communication with VMM must be shared
>> explicitly. The same rule applies for any DMA to and from TDX guest.
>> All DMA pages had to marked as shared pages. A generic way to achieve
>> this without any changes to device drivers is to use the SWIOTLB
>> framework.
>>
>> This method of handling is similar to AMD SEV. So extend this support
>> for TDX guest as well. Also since there are some common code between
>> AMD SEV and TDX guest in mem_encrypt_init(), move it to
>> mem_encrypt_common.c and call AMD specific init function from it
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
>> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes since v4:
>> * Replaced prot_guest_has() with cc_guest_has().
>>
>> Changes since v3:
>> * Rebased on top of Tom Lendacky's protected guest
>> changes (https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/cover/1468760/)
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>> * Removed sme_me_mask check for amd_mem_encrypt_init() in
>> mem_encrypt_init().
>>
>> arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt_common.h | 3 +++
>> arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c | 2 ++
>> arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c | 5 +----
>> arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_common.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt_common.h
>> b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt_common.h
>> index 697bc40a4e3d..bc90e565bce4 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt_common.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt_common.h
>> @@ -8,11 +8,14 @@
>> #ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
>> bool amd_force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev);
>> +void __init amd_mem_encrypt_init(void);
>> #else /* CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT */
>> static inline bool amd_force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> return false;
>> }
>> +
>> +static inline void amd_mem_encrypt_init(void) {}
>> #endif /* CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT */
>> #endif
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c
>> index 433f366ca25c..ce8e3019b812 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c
>> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>> #include <asm/insn.h>
>> #include <asm/insn-eval.h>
>> #include <linux/sched/signal.h> /* force_sig_fault() */
>> +#include <linux/swiotlb.h>
>> /* TDX Module call Leaf IDs */
>> #define TDX_GET_INFO 1
>> @@ -577,6 +578,7 @@ void __init tdx_early_init(void)
>> pv_ops.irq.halt = tdx_halt;
>> legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
>> + swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_FORCE;
>> cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "tdx:cpu_hotplug",
>> NULL, tdx_cpu_offline_prepare);
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
>> index 5d7fbed73949..8385bc4565e9 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
>> @@ -438,14 +438,11 @@ static void print_mem_encrypt_feature_info(void)
>> }
>> /* Architecture __weak replacement functions */
>> -void __init mem_encrypt_init(void)
>> +void __init amd_mem_encrypt_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!sme_me_mask)
>> return;
>> - /* Call into SWIOTLB to update the SWIOTLB DMA buffers */
>> - swiotlb_update_mem_attributes();
>> -
>> /*
>> * With SEV, we need to unroll the rep string I/O instructions,
>> * but SEV-ES supports them through the #VC handler.
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_common.c
>> b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_common.c
>> index 119a9056efbb..6fe44c6cb753 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_common.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_common.c
>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>> #include <asm/mem_encrypt_common.h>
>> #include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
>> #include <linux/cc_platform.h>
>> +#include <linux/swiotlb.h>
>> /* Override for DMA direct allocation check -
>> ARCH_HAS_FORCE_DMA_UNENCRYPTED */
>> bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
>> @@ -24,3 +25,16 @@ bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
>> return false;
>> }
>> +
>> +/* Architecture __weak replacement functions */
>> +void __init mem_encrypt_init(void)
>> +{
>> + /*
>> + * For TDX guest or SEV/SME, call into SWIOTLB to update
>> + * the SWIOTLB DMA buffers
>> + */
>> + if (sme_me_mask || cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT))
>
> Can't you just make this:
>
> if (cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_MEM_ENCRYPT))
>
> SEV will return true if sme_me_mask is not zero and TDX should only
> return true if it is TDX guest, right?
Yes. It can be simplified.
But where shall we leave this function cc_platform.c or here?
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
>> + swiotlb_update_mem_attributes();
>> +
>> + amd_mem_encrypt_init();
>> +}
>>
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists