[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e75603996f88941892a19181c852ecfdc9adf06c.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 23:05:35 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"n.borisov.lkml@...il.com" <n.borisov.lkml@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/12] x86/tdx: Make TDX_HYPERCALL asm similar to
TDX_MODULE_CALL
On Thu, 2023-07-27 at 20:10 +0300, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 11:25:09PM +1200, Kai Huang wrote:
> >
> > Remove the __tdx_hypercall_ret() as __tdx_hypercall() already does so.
>
> Hm. So we now update struct on all VMCALLs. Is it a good idea?
>
Do you mean we "unconditionally save output registers to the structure", right?
> We give
> more control to VMM where it is not needed.
>
I don't quite follow this. Can you elaborate?
Do you worry about VMM being malicious and putting malicious values to the
registers?
> I would rather keep the struct
> read-only where possible.
>
We can achieve this if there's a clean way to do, but I don't see that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists