linux-kernel - [RFC 3/5] selftests: KVM: SEV IOCTL test

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: <20240710220540.188239-4-pratikrajesh.sampat@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:05:38 -0500
From: "Pratik R. Sampat" <pratikrajesh.sampat@....com>
To: <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <shuah@...nel.org>, <thomas.lendacky@....com>, <michael.roth@....com>,
	<seanjc@...gle.com>, <pbonzini@...hat.com>, <pgonda@...gle.com>,
	<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC 3/5] selftests: KVM: SEV IOCTL test

Introduce tests for sev and sev-es ioctl that exercises the boot path
of launch, update and finish on an invalid policy.

Signed-off-by: Pratik R. Sampat <pratikrajesh.sampat@....com>
---
 .../selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c     | 57 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c
index 1a50a280173c..500c67b3793b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c
@@ -131,12 +131,69 @@ static void test_sync_vmsa(uint32_t type, uint32_t policy)
 	kvm_vm_free(vm);
 }
 
+static void sev_guest_status_assert(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t type)
+{
+	struct kvm_sev_guest_status status;
+	bool cond;
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = __vm_sev_ioctl(vm, KVM_SEV_GUEST_STATUS, &status);
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ? !ret : ret;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "KVM_SEV_GUEST_STATUS should fail, invalid VM Type.");
+}
+
+static void test_sev_launch(void *guest_code, uint32_t type, uint64_t policy)
+{
+	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
+	struct kvm_vm *vm;
+	struct ucall uc;
+	bool cond;
+	int ret;
+
+	vm = vm_sev_create_with_one_vcpu(type, guest_code, &vcpu);
+	ret = sev_vm_launch_start(vm, 0);
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ? !ret : ret;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_START should fail, invalid policy.");
+
+	ret = sev_vm_launch_update(vm, policy);
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ? !ret : ret;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_UPDATE should fail, invalid policy.");
+	sev_guest_status_assert(vm, type);
+
+	ret = sev_vm_launch_measure(vm, alloca(256));
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ? !ret : ret;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_MEASURE should fail, invalid policy.");
+	sev_guest_status_assert(vm, type);
+
+	ret = sev_vm_launch_finish(vm);
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ? !ret : ret;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_FINISH should fail, invalid policy.");
+	sev_guest_status_assert(vm, type);
+
+	vcpu_run(vcpu);
+	get_ucall(vcpu, &uc);
+	cond = type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM ?
+		vcpu->run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO :
+		vcpu->run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_FAIL_ENTRY;
+	TEST_ASSERT(cond,
+		    "vcpu_run should fail, invalid policy.");
+
+	kvm_vm_free(vm);
+}
+
 static void test_sev(void *guest_code, uint32_t type, uint64_t policy)
 {
 	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
 	struct kvm_vm *vm;
 	struct ucall uc;
 
+	test_sev_launch(guest_code, type, policy);
+
 	vm = vm_sev_create_with_one_vcpu(type, guest_code, &vcpu);
 
 	/* TODO: Validate the measurement is as expected. */
-- 
2.34.1