[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9e8a98ad-1f8d-a09c-3173-71c5c3ab5ed4@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:07:06 +0800
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, isaku.yamahata@...el.com
Cc: 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 7/21/2023 10:51 PM, Sean Christopherson 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.
generalizing the struct of KVM_MEM_ENC_OP should be the first step. The
final target should be generalizing a set of commands for confidential
VMs (SEV-* VMs and TDs, maybe even for other arches), e.g., the commands
to create a confidential VM and commands to live migration a
confidential VM.
However, there seems not small divergence between the commands to create
a SEV-* VM and TDX VMs. I'm not sure if it is worth investigating and
pursuing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists