linux-kernel - Re: [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: <CAMkAt6qxaJwobxesMyg8vssgVDCH+fBLb_vW_vARxAcRFQQQ4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:23:19 -0600
From: Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>
To: "Pratik R. Sampat" <pratikrajesh.sampat@....com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org, thomas.lendacky@....com, 
	michael.roth@....com, seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/5] selftests: KVM: SEV IOCTL test

> +
> +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.");

Isn't the reason we expect all other calls to fail here because we
have not successfully called `sev_vm_launch_start()`?

> +       sev_guest_status_assert(vm, type);
> +
> +       ret = sev_vm_launch_measure(vm, alloca(256));

Should we free this buffer?