linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/30] KVM: VMX: Initialize TDX during KVM module load

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: <2c26365b88b531756ea75a0951895cfcdb5c439b.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:31:49 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
	<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y"
	<yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/30] KVM: VMX: Initialize TDX during KVM module load

On Mon, 2025-02-24 at 19:57 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 2/21/25 00:27, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > Hi Paolo,
> > 
> > This patch still doesn't address a bug Chao pointed out, that the
> > __do_tdx_cleanup() can be called from __do_tdx_bringup() with cpus_read_lock()
> > being hold, so we need to use cpuhp_remove_state_nocalls_cpuslocked() in
> > __do_tdx_cleanup().
> > 
> > I posted a diff to address here:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/46ea74bcd8eebe241a143e9280c65ca33cb8dcce.camel@intel.com/T/#m1e86328e69b27e6cc9978f90df923144d699c350
> > 
> > It would be great if you could squash to the kvm-coco-queue.  There will be some
> > minor rebase conflict to the rest patches, though, so if you want me to send out
> > fixup patch(es) for you to squash please do let me know.
> > 
> > Btw, the diff also moves the 'enable_virt_at_load' check to
> > kvm_can_support_tdx(), which isn't related to this issue.  Below is the diff
> > (also attached) w/o this code change but only to address the above bug if you
> > prefer.
> 
> Thank, I applied this one.  
> 

Thanks!

> In fact I think we can remove 
> kvm_can_support_tdx() altogether and inline it in tdx_bringup(),
> since there are other checks like MOVDIR64B.

Or we can put all the pre-requirement checks to kvm_can_support_tdx() -- both
work for me :-)

> 
> The conflicts are not problematic so I'm happy to solve them for you.

Thanks Paolo!