linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: SEV: Return appropriate error codes if SEV-ES scratch setup fails

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:47:33 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: SEV: Return appropriate error codes if SEV-ES
 scratch setup fails

On 11/11/21 16:14, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> 
>> Return appropriate error codes if setting up the GHCB scratch area for an
>> SEV-ES guest fails.  In particular, returning -EINVAL instead of -ENOMEM
>> when allocating the kernel buffer could be confusing as userspace would
>> likely suspect a guest issue.
> 
> Based on previous feedback and to implement the changes to the GHCB 
> specification, I'm planning on submitting a patch that will return an 
> error code back to the guest, instead of terminating the guest, if the 
> scratch area fails to be setup properly. So you could hold off on this 
> patch if you want.

I think we still want these two patches in 5.16.

Paolo