linux-kernel - Re: [PULL 00/19] KVM: Add AMD Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP) Hypervisor Support

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]

Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 20:06:45 -0500
From: Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CC: <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sean Christopherson
	<seanjc@...gle.com>, <linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, <jroedel@...e.de>,
	<thomas.lendacky@....com>, <vkuznets@...hat.com>, <pgonda@...gle.com>,
	<rientjes@...gle.com>, <tobin@....com>, <bp@...en8.de>, <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	<alpergun@...gle.com>, <ashish.kalra@....com>, <nikunj.dadhania@....com>,
	<pankaj.gupta@....com>, <liam.merwick@...cle.com>, <papaluri@....com>
Subject: Re: [PULL 00/19] KVM: Add AMD Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP)
 Hypervisor Support

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 10:17:06AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 9:14 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:17 PM Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Paolo,
> > >
> > > This pull request contains v15 of the KVM SNP support patchset[1] along
> > > with fixes and feedback from you and Sean regarding PSC request processing,
> > > fast_page_fault() handling for SNP/TDX, and avoiding uncessary
> > > PSMASH/zapping for KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT events. It's also been rebased
> > > on top of kvm/queue (commit 1451476151e0), and re-tested with/without
> > > 2MB gmem pages enabled.
> >
> > Pulled into kvm-coco-queue, thanks (and sorry for the sev_complete_psc
> > mess up - it seemed too good to be true that the PSC changes were all
> > fine...).

That issue was actually introduced from my end while applying the changes,
so I think your suggested changes did pretty much work as-written. :)

> 
> ... and there was a missing signoff in "KVM: SVM: Add module parameter
> to enable SEV-SNP" so I ended up not using the pull request. But it
> was still good to have it because it made it simpler to double check
> what you tested vs. what I applied.
> 
> Also I have already received the full set of pull requests for
> submaintainers, so I put it in kvm/next.  It's not impossible that it
> ends up in the 6.10 merge window, so I might as well give it a week or
> two in linux-next.

Makes sense; glad to hear it! I've re-tested the kvm/next version and
everything looks good. Will also get our CI configured to monitor kvm/next
as well.

Thanks,

Mike

> 
> Paolo
> 
> 
> Paolo
>