linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 09/10] KVM: x86: Make struct sev_cmd common for KVM_MEM_ENC

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: <20230721184343.GI25699@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:43:43 -0700
From:   Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     isaku.yamahata@...el.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, isaku.yamahata@...il.com,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, erdemaktas@...gle.com,
        Sagi Shahar <sagis@...gle.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
        Zhi Wang <zhi.wang.linux@...il.com>, chen.bo@...el.com,
        linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
        Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Yuan Yao <yuan.yao@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 09/10] KVM: x86: Make struct sev_cmd common for
 KVM_MEM_ENC_OP

On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 07:51:04AM -0700,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, isaku.yamahata@...el.com wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > index aa7a56a47564..32883e520b00 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > @@ -562,6 +562,39 @@ struct kvm_pmu_event_filter {
> >  /* x86-specific KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL flags. */
> >  #define KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL_LONG_MODE	BIT(0)
> >  
> > +struct kvm_mem_enc_cmd {
> > +	/* sub-command id of KVM_MEM_ENC_OP. */
> > +	__u32 id;
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Auxiliary flags for sub-command.  If sub-command doesn't use it,
> > +	 * set zero.
> > +	 */
> > +	__u32 flags;
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Data for sub-command.  An immediate or a pointer to the actual
> > +	 * data in process virtual address.  If sub-command doesn't use it,
> > +	 * set zero.
> > +	 */
> > +	__u64 data;
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Supplemental error code in the case of error.
> > +	 * SEV error code from the PSP or TDX SEAMCALL status code.
> > +	 * The caller should set zero.
> > +	 */
> > +	union {
> > +		struct {
> > +			__u32 error;
> > +			/*
> > +			 * KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_START and KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_START
> > +			 * require extra data. Not included in struct
> > +			 * kvm_sev_launch_start or struct kvm_sev_receive_start.
> > +			 */
> > +			__u32 sev_fd;
> > +		};
> > +		__u64 error64;
> > +	};
> > +};
> 
> Eww.  Why not just use an entirely different struct for TDX?  I don't see what
> benefit this provides other than a warm fuzzy feeling that TDX and SEV share a
> struct.  Practically speaking, KVM will likely take on more work to forcefully
> smush the two together than if they're separate things.

Ok, let's drop this patch. Keep the ABI different for now.
-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>