[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240529005519.GA386318@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 17:55:19 -0700
From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
Cc: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, isaku.yamahata@...el.com,
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,
Fengwei Yin <fengwei.yin@...el.com>, isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 070/130] KVM: TDX: TDP MMU TDX support
On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 04:45:15PM +0800,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com> wrote:
> On 2024-03-28 at 11:12:57 +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> > >+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV)
> > >+static int vt_flush_remote_tlbs(struct kvm *kvm);
> > >+#endif
> > >+
> > > static __init int vt_hardware_setup(void)
> > > {
> > > int ret;
> > >@@ -49,11 +53,29 @@ static __init int vt_hardware_setup(void)
> > > pr_warn_ratelimited("TDX requires mmio caching. Please enable mmio caching for TDX.\n");
> > > }
> > >
> > >+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV)
> > >+ /*
> > >+ * TDX KVM overrides flush_remote_tlbs method and assumes
> > >+ * flush_remote_tlbs_range = NULL that falls back to
> > >+ * flush_remote_tlbs. Disable TDX if there are conflicts.
> > >+ */
> > >+ if (vt_x86_ops.flush_remote_tlbs ||
> > >+ vt_x86_ops.flush_remote_tlbs_range) {
> > >+ enable_tdx = false;
> > >+ pr_warn_ratelimited("TDX requires baremetal. Not Supported on VMM guest.\n");
> > >+ }
> > >+#endif
> > >+
> > > enable_tdx = enable_tdx && !tdx_hardware_setup(&vt_x86_ops);
> > > if (enable_tdx)
> > > vt_x86_ops.vm_size = max_t(unsigned int, vt_x86_ops.vm_size,
> > > sizeof(struct kvm_tdx));
> > >
> > >+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV)
> > >+ if (enable_tdx)
> > >+ vt_x86_ops.flush_remote_tlbs = vt_flush_remote_tlbs;
> >
> > Is this hook necessary/beneficial to TDX?
> >
>
> I think so.
>
> We happended to encounter the following error and breaks the boot up:
> "SEAMCALL (0x000000000000000f) failed: 0xc0000b0800000001"
> 0xc0000b0800000001 indicates the TDX_TLB_TRACKING_NOT_DONE, and it is caused
> by page demotion but not yet doing a tlb shotdown by tlb track.
>
>
> It was found on my system the CONFIG_HYPERV is not set, and it makes
> kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs() not invoking tdx_track() before the
> tdh_mem_page_demote(), which caused the problem.
>
> > if no, we can leave .flush_remote_tlbs as NULL. if yes, we should do:
> >
> > struct kvm_x86_ops {
> > ...
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV) || IS_ENABLED(TDX...)
> > int (*flush_remote_tlbs)(struct kvm *kvm);
> > int (*flush_remote_tlbs_range)(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn,
> > gfn_t nr_pages);
> > #endif
>
> If the flush_remote_tlbs implementation are both available in HYPERV and TDX,
> does it make sense to remove the config checks? I thought when commit 0277022a77a5
> was introduced, the only user of flush_remote_tlbs() is hyperv, and now
> there is TDX.
You don't like IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TDX_HOST) in many
places? Then, we can do something like the followings. Although It would be
a bit ugly than the commit of 0277022a77a5, it's better to keep the intention
of it.
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HYPERV) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TDX_HOST)
# define KVM_X86_WANT_FLUSH_REMOTE_TLBS
#endif
#if IS_DEFINED(KVM_X86_WANT_FLUSH_REMOTE_TLBS)
..
#endif
--
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists