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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:56:54 -0600
From:   Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.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 9:47 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 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.

Ok, I'll rebase my changes on top of these then once you push them.

Thanks,
Tom

> 
> Paolo
>