[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SA1PR21MB1335B3D89CCF3EB16A94E424BF13A@SA1PR21MB1335.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 23:43:45 +0000
From: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
To: Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@...il.com>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
"wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
CC: Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
vkuznets <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V5 5/8] x86/hyperv: Use vmmcall to implement Hyper-V
hypercall in sev-snp enlightened guest
> From: Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@...il.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2023 9:04 AM
> [...]
> @@ -103,7 +103,8 @@ static inline u64 _hv_do_fast_hypercall8(u64 control,
> u64 input1)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> {
> - __asm__ __volatile__(CALL_NOSPEC
> + __asm__ __volatile__("mov %[thunk_target], %%r8\n"
The "mov %[thunk_target], %%r8\n" is dubious.
I removed it and the kernel still worked fine for my regular VM (on an AMD host)
and for my SNP VM (with HCL).
I suspect a fully enlightened SNP VM also doesn't need it as this hypercall
doesn't really need an output param.
I noticed your
[PATCH V5 8/8] x86/hyperv: Add hyperv-specific handling for VMMCALL under SEV-ES
exposes r8 to the hypervisor:
+static void hv_sev_es_hcall_prepare(struct ghcb *ghcb, struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ /* RAX and CPL are already in the GHCB */
+ ghcb_set_rcx(ghcb, regs->cx);
+ ghcb_set_rdx(ghcb, regs->dx);
+ ghcb_set_r8(ghcb, regs->r8);
+}
I guess the intent here is that we want to pass a deterministic value in R8 (rather
a random value) to the hypervisor for security's purpose. If so, can we just set
R8 to 0 rather than %[thunk_target]?
Please add a comment.
Sorry, I was not in the earlier discussion, so I may be missing something.
> + ALTERNATIVE(CALL_NOSPEC, "vmmcall",
> X86_FEATURE_SEV_ES)
> : "=a" (hv_status),
> ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
> "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
> : THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists