Message-Id: <20240618165059.10174-1-mhklinux@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:50:59 -0700
From: mhkelley58@...il.com
To: kys@...rosoft.com,
	haiyangz@...rosoft.com,
	wei.liu@...nel.org,
	decui@...rosoft.com,
	corbet@....net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation: hyperv: Add overview of Confidential Computing VM support

From: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>

Add documentation topic for Confidential Computing (CoCo) VM support
in Linux guests on Hyper-V.

Signed-off-by: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>
---
Changes in v2:
* Added hyperlink to Coconut github project

 Documentation/virt/hyperv/coco.rst  | 260 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 Documentation/virt/hyperv/index.rst |   1 +
 2 files changed, 261 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/virt/hyperv/coco.rst

diff --git a/Documentation/virt/hyperv/coco.rst b/Documentation/virt/hyperv/coco.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c15d6fe34b4e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/virt/hyperv/coco.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,260 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+Confidential Computing VMs
+==========================
+Hyper-V can create and run Linux guests that are Confidential Computing
+(CoCo) VMs. Such VMs cooperate with the physical processor to better protect
+the confidentiality and integrity of data in the VM's memory, even in the
+face of a hypervisor/VMM that has been compromised and may behave maliciously.
+CoCo VMs on Hyper-V share the generic CoCo VM threat model and security
+objectives described in Documentation/security/snp-tdx-threat-model.rst. Note
+that Hyper-V specific code in Linux refers to CoCo VMs as "isolated VMs" or
+"isolation VMs".
+
+A Linux CoCo VM on Hyper-V requires the cooperation and interaction of the
+following:
+
+* Physical hardware with a processor that supports CoCo VMs
+
+* The hardware runs a version of Windows/Hyper-V with support for CoCo VMs
+
+* The VM runs a version of Linux that supports being a CoCo VM
+
+The physical hardware requirements are as follows:
+
+* AMD processor with SEV-SNP. Hyper-V does not run guest VMs with AMD SME,
+  SEV, or SEV-ES encryption, and such encryption is not sufficient for a CoCo
+  VM on Hyper-V.
+
+* Intel processor with TDX
+
+To create a CoCo VM, the "Isolated VM" attribute must be specified to Hyper-V
+when the VM is created. A VM cannot be changed from a CoCo VM to a normal VM,
+or vice versa, after it is created.
+
+Operational Modes
+-----------------
+Hyper-V CoCo VMs can run in two modes. The mode is selected when the VM is
+created and cannot be changed during the life of the VM.
+
+* Fully-enlightened mode. In this mode, the guest operating system is
+  enlightened to understand and manage all aspects of running as a CoCo VM.
+
+* Paravisor mode. In this mode, a paravisor layer between the guest and the
+  host provides some operations needed to run as a CoCo VM. The guest operating
+  system can have fewer CoCo enlightenments than is required in the
+  fully-enlightened case.
+
+Conceptually, fully-enlightened mode and paravisor mode may be treated as
+points on a spectrum spanning the degree of guest enlightenment needed to run
+as a CoCo VM. Fully-enlightened mode is one end of the spectrum. A full
+implementation of paravisor mode is the other end of the spectrum, where all
+aspects of running as a CoCo VM are handled by the paravisor, and a normal
+guest OS with no knowledge of memory encryption or other aspects of CoCo VMs
+can run successfully. However, the Hyper-V implementation of paravisor mode
+does not go this far, and is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. Some
+aspects of CoCo VMs are handled by the Hyper-V paravisor while the guest OS
+must be enlightened for other aspects. Unfortunately, there is no
+standardized enumeration of feature/functions that might be provided in the
+paravisor, and there is no standardized mechanism for a guest OS to query the
+paravisor for the feature/functions it provides. The understanding of what
+the paravisor provides is hard-coded in the guest OS.
+
+Paravisor mode has similarities to the `Coconut project`_, which aims to provide
+a limited paravisor to provide services to the guest such as a virtual TPM.
+However, the Hyper-V paravisor generally handles more aspects of CoCo VMs
+than is currently envisioned for Coconut, and so is further toward the "no
+guest enlightenments required" end of the spectrum.
+
+.. _Coconut project: https://github.com/coconut-svsm/svsm
+
+In the CoCo VM threat model, the paravisor is in the guest security domain
+and must be trusted by the guest OS. By implication, the hypervisor/VMM must
+protect itself against a potentially malicious paravisor just like it
+protects against a potentially malicious guest.
+
+The hardware architectural approach to fully-enlightened vs. paravisor mode
+varies depending on the underlying processor.
+
+* With AMD SEV-SNP processors, in fully-enlightened mode the guest OS runs in
+  VMPL 0 and has full control of the guest context. In paravisor mode, the
+  guest OS runs in VMPL 2 and the paravisor runs in VMPL 0. The paravisor
+  running in VMPL 0 has privileges that the guest OS in VMPL 2 does not have.
+  Certain operations require the guest to invoke the paravisor. Furthermore, in
+  paravisor mode the guest OS operates in "virtual Top Of Memory" (vTOM) mode
+  as defined by the SEV-SNP architecture. This mode simplifies guest management
+  of memory encryption when a paravisor is used.
+
+* With Intel TDX processor, in fully-enlightened mode the guest OS runs in an
+  L1 VM. In paravisor mode, TD partitioning is used. The paravisor runs in the
+  L1 VM, and the guest OS runs in a nested L2 VM.
+
+Hyper-V exposes a synthetic MSR to guests that describes the CoCo mode. This
+MSR indicates if the underlying processor uses AMD SEV-SNP or Intel TDX, and
+whether a paravisor is being used. It is straightforward to build a single
+kernel image that can boot and run properly on either architecture, and in
+either mode.
+
+Paravisor Effects
+-----------------
+Running in paravisor mode affects the following areas of generic Linux kernel
+CoCo VM functionality:
+
+* Initial guest memory setup. When a new VM is created in paravisor mode, the
+  paravisor runs first and sets up the guest physical memory as encrypted. The
+  guest Linux does normal memory initialization, except for explicitly marking
+  appropriate ranges as decrypted (shared). In paravisor mode, Linux does not
+  perform the early boot memory setup steps that are particularly tricky with
+  AMD SEV-SNP in fully-enlightened mode.
+
+* #VC/#VE exception handling. In paravisor mode, Hyper-V configures the guest
+  CoCo VM to route #VC and #VE exceptions to VMPL 0 and the L1 VM,
+  respectively, and not the guest Linux. Consequently, these exception handlers
+  do not run in the guest Linux and are not a required enlightenment for a
+  Linux guest in paravisor mode.
+
+* CPUID flags. Both AMD SEV-SNP and Intel TDX provide a CPUID flag in the
+  guest indicating that the VM is operating with the respective hardware
+  support. While these CPUID flags are visible in fully-enlightened CoCo VMs,
+  the paravisor filters out these flags and the guest Linux does not see them.
+  Throughout the Linux kernel, explicitly testing these flags has mostly been
+  eliminated in favor of the cc_platform_has() function, with the goal of
+  abstracting the differences between SEV-SNP and TDX. But the
+  cc_platform_has() abstraction also allows the Hyper-V paravisor configuration
+  to selectively enable aspects of CoCo VM functionality even when the CPUID
+  flags are not set. The exception is early boot memory setup on SEV-SNP, which
+  tests the CPUID SEV-SNP flag. But not having the flag in Hyper-V paravisor
+  mode VM achieves the desired effect or not running SEV-SNP specific early
+  boot memory setup.
+
+* Device emulation. In paravisor mode, the Hyper-V paravisor provides
+  emulation of devices such as the IO-APIC and TPM. Because the emulation
+  happens in the paravisor in the guest context (instead of the hypervisor/VMM
+  context), MMIO accesses to these devices must be encrypted references instead
+  of the decrypted references that would be used in a fully-enlightened CoCo
+  VM. The __ioremap_caller() function has been enhanced to make a callback to
+  check whether a particular address range should be treated as encrypted
+  (private). See the "is_private_mmio" callback.
+
+* Encrypt/decrypt memory transitions. In a CoCo VM, transitioning guest
+  memory between encrypted and decrypted requires coordinating with the
+  hypervisor/VMM. This is done via callbacks invoked from
+  __set_memory_enc_pgtable(). In fully-enlightened mode, the normal SEV-SNP and
+  TDX implementations of these callbacks are used. In paravisor mode, a Hyper-V
+  specific set of callbacks is used. These callbacks invoke the paravisor so
+  that the paravisor can coordinate the transitions and inform the hypervisor
+  as necessary. See hv_vtom_init() where these callback are set up.
+
+* Interrupt injection. In fully enlightened mode, a malicious hypervisor
+  could inject interrupts into the guest OS at times that violate x86/x64
+  architectural rules. For full protection, the guest OS should include
+  enlightenments that use the interrupt injection management features provided
+  by CoCo-capable processors. In paravisor mode, the paravisor mediates
+  interrupt injection into the guest OS, and ensures that the guest OS only
+  sees interrupts that are "legal". The paravisor uses the interrupt injection
+  management features provided by the CoCo-capable physical processor, thereby
+  masking these complexities from the guest OS.
+
+Hyper-V Hypercalls
+------------------
+When in fully-enlightened mode, hypercalls made by the Linux guest are routed
+directly to the hypervisor, just as in a non-CoCo VM. But in paravisor mode,
+normal hypercalls trap to the paravisor first, which may in turn invoke the
+hypervisor. But the paravisor is idiosyncratic in this regard, and a few
+hypercalls made by the Linux guest must always be routed directly to the
+hypervisor. These hypercall sites test for a paravisor being present, and use
+a special invocation sequence. See hv_post_message(), for example.
+
+Guest communication with Hyper-V
+--------------------------------
+Separate from the generic Linux kernel handling of memory encryption in Linux
+CoCo VMs, Hyper-V has VMBus and VMBus devices that communicate using memory
+shared between the Linux guest and the host. This shared memory must be
+marked decrypted to enable communication. Furthermore, since the threat model
+includes a compromised and potentially malicious host, the guest must guard
+against leaking any unintended data to the host through this shared memory.
+
+These Hyper-V and VMBus memory pages are marked as decrypted:
+
+* VMBus monitor pages
+
+* Synthetic interrupt controller (synic) related pages (unless supplied by
+  the paravisor)
+
+* Per-cpu hypercall input and output pages (unless running with a paravisor)
+
+* VMBus ring buffers. The direct mapping is marked decrypted in
+  __vmbus_establish_gpadl(). The secondary mapping created in
+  hv_ringbuffer_init() must also include the "decrypted" attribute.
+
+When the guest writes data to memory that is shared with the host, it must
+ensure that only the intended data is written. Padding or unused fields must
+be initialized to zeros before copying into the shared memory so that random
+kernel data is not inadvertently given to the host.
+
+Similarly, when the guest reads memory that is shared with the host, it must
+validate the data before acting on it so that a malicious host cannot induce
+the guest to expose unintended data. Doing such validation can be tricky
+because the host can modify the shared memory areas even while or after
+validation is performed. For messages passed from the host to the guest in a
+VMBus ring buffer, the length of the message is validated, and the message is
+copied into a temporary (encrypted) buffer for further validation and
+processing. The copying adds a small amount of overhead, but is the only way
+to protect against a malicious host. See hv_pkt_iter_first().
+
+Many drivers for VMBus devices have been "hardened" by adding code to fully
+validate messages received over VMBus, instead of assuming that Hyper-V is
+acting cooperatively. Such drivers are marked as "allowed_in_isolated" in the
+vmbus_devs[] table. Other drivers for VMBus devices that are not needed in a
+CoCo VM have not been hardened, and they are not allowed to load in a CoCo
+VM. See vmbus_is_valid_offer() where such devices are excluded.
+
+Two VMBus devices depend on the Hyper-V host to do DMA data transfers:
+storvsc for disk I/O and netvsc for network I/O. storvsc uses the normal
+Linux kernel DMA APIs, and so bounce buffering through decrypted swiotlb
+memory is done implicitly. netvsc has two modes for data transfers. The first
+mode goes through send and receive buffer space that is explicitly allocated
+by the netvsc driver, and is used for most smaller packets. These send and
+receive buffers are marked decrypted by __vmbus_establish_gpadl(). Because
+the netvsc driver explicitly copies packets to/from these buffers, the
+equivalent of bounce buffering between encrypted and decrypted memory is
+already part of the data path. The second mode uses the normal Linux kernel
+DMA APIs, and is bounce buffered through swiotlb memory implicitly like in
+storvsc.
+
+Finally, the VMBus virtual PCI driver needs special handling in a CoCo VM.
+Linux PCI device drivers access PCI config space using standard APIs provided
+by the Linux PCI subsystem. On Hyper-V, these functions directly access MMIO
+space, and the access traps to Hyper-V for emulation. But in CoCo VMs, memory
+encryption prevents Hyper-V from reading the guest instruction stream to
+emulate the access. So in a CoCo VM, these functions must make a hypercall
+with arguments explicitly describing the access. See
+_hv_pcifront_read_config() and _hv_pcifront_write_config() and the
+"use_calls" flag indicating to use hypercalls.
+
+load_unaligned_zeropad()
+------------------------
+When transitioning memory between encrypted and decrypted, the caller of
+set_memory_encrypted() or set_memory_decrypted() is responsible for ensuring
+the memory isn't in use and isn't referenced while the transition is in
+progress. The transition has multiple steps, and includes interaction with
+the Hyper-V host. The memory is in an inconsistent state until all steps are
+complete. A reference while the state is inconsistent could result in an
+exception that can't be cleanly fixed up.
+
+However, the kernel load_unaligned_zeropad() mechanism may make stray
+references that can't be prevented by the caller of set_memory_encrypted() or
+set_memory_decrypted(), so there's specific code in the #VC or #VE exception
+handler to fixup this case. But a CoCo VM running on Hyper-V may be
+configured to run with a paravisor, with the #VC or #VE exception routed to
+the paravisor. There's no architectural way to forward the exceptions back to
+the guest kernel, and in such a case, the load_unaligned_zeropad() fixup code
+in the #VC/#VE handlers doesn't run.
+
+To avoid this problem, the Hyper-V specific functions for notifying the
+hypervisor of the transition mark pages as "not present" while a transition
+is in progress. If load_unaligned_zeropad() causes a stray reference, a
+normal page fault is generated instead of #VC or #VE, and the page-fault-
+based handlers for load_unaligned_zeropad() fixup the reference. When the
+encrypted/decrypted transition is complete, the pages are marked as "present"
+again. See hv_vtom_clear_present() and hv_vtom_set_host_visibility().
diff --git a/Documentation/virt/hyperv/index.rst b/Documentation/virt/hyperv/index.rst
index de447e11b4a5..79bc4080329e 100644
--- a/Documentation/virt/hyperv/index.rst
+++ b/Documentation/virt/hyperv/index.rst
@@ -11,3 +11,4 @@ Hyper-V Enlightenments
    vmbus
    clocks
    vpci
+   coco
-- 
2.25.1

Powered by blists - more mailing lists