linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v7 25/64] crypto: ccp: Add support to initialize the AMD-SP for SEV-SNP

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]

Message-ID: <897b503e-48d1-bc4b-1e68-42792d589ddb@amd.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 16:54:23 -0600
From:   "Kalra, Ashish" <ashish.kalra@....com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        jroedel@...e.de, thomas.lendacky@....com, hpa@...or.com,
        ardb@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
        vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com,
        luto@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, slp@...hat.com,
        pgonda@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
        dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com, tobin@....com, bp@...en8.de,
        vbabka@...e.cz, kirill@...temov.name, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, marcorr@...gle.com,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, alpergun@...gle.com,
        dgilbert@...hat.com, harald@...fian.com,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v7 25/64] crypto: ccp: Add support to initialize the
 AMD-SP for SEV-SNP

Hello Jarkko,

On 1/4/2023 6:12 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 01:40:17PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote:
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If boot CPU supports SNP, then first attempt to initialize
>> +	 * the SNP firmware.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP)) {
>> +		if (!sev_version_greater_or_equal(SNP_MIN_API_MAJOR, SNP_MIN_API_MINOR)) {
>> +			dev_err(sev->dev, "SEV-SNP support requires firmware version >= %d:%d\n",
>> +				SNP_MIN_API_MAJOR, SNP_MIN_API_MINOR);
>> +		} else {
>> +			rc = sev_snp_init(&error, true);
>> +			if (rc) {
>> +				/*
>> +				 * Don't abort the probe if SNP INIT failed,
>> +				 * continue to initialize the legacy SEV firmware.
>> +				 */
>> +				dev_err(sev->dev, "SEV-SNP: failed to INIT error %#x\n", error);
>> +			}
>> +		}
>> +	}
> 
> I think this is not right as there is a dep between sev init and this,
> and there is about a dozen of call sites already __sev_platform_init_locked().
> 

sev_init ?

As this is invoked during CCP module load/initialization, shouldn't this 
get invoked before any other call sites invoking 
__sev_platform_init_locked() ?

Thanks,
Ashish

> Instead there should be __sev_snp_init_locked() that would be called as
> part of __sev_platform_init_locked() flow.
> 
> Also TMR allocation should be moved inside __sev_platform_init_locked,
> given that it needs to be marked into RMP after SNP init.
> 
> BR, Jarkko
>