[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <23b851db-a2a6-a854-94fc-a747f360d509@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 07:27:33 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
lists@...dbynature.de, mikelley@...rosoft.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Shutemov, Kirill" <kirill.shutemov@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/mtrr: support setting MTRR state for software
defined MTRRs
On 2/13/23 07:11, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 04:03:07PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> Wouldn't !cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) be enough?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure we won't need that for TDX guests, too.
>> See, that's the problem. I wanna have it simple too. Lemme check with
>> dhansen.
> He says MTRRs are enabled in TDX guests: "X86_FEATURE_MTRR is fixed to
> 1 in TDX guests."
>
> So we will have to do the more finer-grained check I guess.
Yes, TDX guests see MTRRs as being supported. But, the TDX module also
appears to inject a #VE for all RDMSR or WRMSR's to the MTRRs. That
makes them effectively useless.
I actually don't know what the heck TDX guests are supposed to do if
they feel like mucking with the MSRs. The architecture (CPUID) is
essentially telling them: "Sure, go ahead MTRRs are fiiiiiiine". But
the TDX module is sitting there throwing exceptions (#VE) if the guest
tries to touch MTRRs.
It sounds like there are some guest<->host ABIs on Xen to help the
guests do this. But I don't see anything in the TDX "GHCI" about it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists