[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231124142043.GJZWCxOxeX0MLyZEWs@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:20:43 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
jroedel@...e.de, thomas.lendacky@....com, hpa@...or.com,
ardb@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, jmattson@...gle.com, luto@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, slp@...hat.com, pgonda@...gle.com,
peterz@...radead.org, srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com, tobin@....com,
vbabka@...e.cz, kirill@...temov.name, ak@...ux.intel.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, marcorr@...gle.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, alpergun@...gle.com,
jarkko@...nel.org, ashish.kalra@....com, nikunj.dadhania@....com,
pankaj.gupta@....com, liam.merwick@...cle.com,
zhi.a.wang@...el.com, Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 12/50] x86/sev: Invalidate pages from the direct map
when adding them to the RMP table
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 08:27:41AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
>
> The integrity guarantee of SEV-SNP is enforced through the RMP table.
> The RMP is used with standard x86 and IOMMU page tables to enforce
> memory restrictions and page access rights. The RMP check is enforced as
> soon as SEV-SNP is enabled globally in the system. When hardware
> encounters an RMP-check failure, it raises a page-fault exception.
>
> The rmp_make_private() and rmp_make_shared() helpers are used to add
> or remove the pages from the RMP table. Improve the rmp_make_private()
> to invalidate state so that pages cannot be used in the direct-map after
> they are added the RMP table, and restored to their default valid
> permission after the pages are removed from the RMP table.
Brijesh's SOB comes
<--- here,
then Ashish's two tags.
Please audit your whole set for such inconsistencies.
> @@ -404,6 +440,21 @@ static int rmpupdate(u64 pfn, struct rmp_state *val)
> if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP))
> return -ENXIO;
>
> + level = RMP_TO_X86_PG_LEVEL(val->pagesize);
> + npages = page_level_size(level) / PAGE_SIZE;
> +
> + /*
> + * If page is getting assigned in the RMP table then unmap it from the
> + * direct map.
Here I'm missing the explanation *why* the pages need to be unmapped
from the direct map.
What happens if not?
> + */
> + if (val->assigned) {
> + if (invalidate_direct_map(pfn, npages)) {
> + pr_err("Failed to unmap %d pages at pfn 0x%llx from the direct_map\n",
> + npages, pfn);
invalidate_direct_map() already dumps an error message - no need to do
that here too.
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> + }
> +
> do {
> /* Binutils version 2.36 supports the RMPUPDATE mnemonic. */
> asm volatile(".byte 0xF2, 0x0F, 0x01, 0xFE"
> @@ -422,6 +473,17 @@ static int rmpupdate(u64 pfn, struct rmp_state *val)
> return -EFAULT;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Restore the direct map after the page is removed from the RMP table.
> + */
> + if (!val->assigned) {
> + if (restore_direct_map(pfn, npages)) {
> + pr_err("Failed to map %d pages at pfn 0x%llx into the direct_map\n",
> + npages, pfn);
Ditto.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists