linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v19 091/130] KVM: TDX: remove use of struct vcpu_vmx from posted

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: <f0f41485-3013-4aa7-ad8f-6e6c7acfe364@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:16:24 +0800
From: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
To: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 isaku.yamahata@...il.com, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
 erdemaktas@...gle.com, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
 Sagi Shahar <sagis@...gle.com>, Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
 chen.bo@...el.com, hang.yuan@...el.com, tina.zhang@...el.com,
 isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 091/130] KVM: TDX: remove use of struct vcpu_vmx from
 posted_interrupt.c



On 3/29/2024 5:10 AM, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 04:12:36PM +0800,
> Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com> wrote:
>
>>> }
>>>
>>> void vmx_vcpu_pi_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> @@ -200,7 +222,8 @@ void vmx_vcpu_pi_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> 	if (!vmx_needs_pi_wakeup(vcpu))
>>> 		return;
>>>
>>> -	if (kvm_vcpu_is_blocking(vcpu) && !vmx_interrupt_blocked(vcpu))
>>> +	if (kvm_vcpu_is_blocking(vcpu) &&
>>> +	    (is_td_vcpu(vcpu) || !vmx_interrupt_blocked(vcpu)))
>> Ditto.
>>
>> This looks incorrect to me. here we assume interrupt is always enabled for TD.
>> But on TDVMCALL(HLT), the guest tells KVM if hlt is called with interrupt
>> disabled. KVM can just check that interrupt status passed from the guest.
> That's true.  We can complicate this function and HLT emulation.  But I don't
> think it's worthwhile because HLT with interrupt masked is rare.  Only for
> CPU online.
Then, it's better to add some comments?