linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] KVM: TDX: Exit to userspace for GetTdVmCallInfo

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: <d53d6131-bf99-4bb0-8d25-00834864402d@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 10:37:08 +0800
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
To: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
 "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
 "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
 "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com" <mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@...el.com>,
 "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
 "Lindgren, Tony" <tony.lindgren@...el.com>,
 "Shutemov, Kirill" <kirill.shutemov@...el.com>,
 "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] KVM: TDX: Exit to userspace for GetTdVmCallInfo

On 6/11/2025 10:04 AM, Binbin Wu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/11/2025 12:54 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
>> On Tue, 2025-06-10 at 09:50 -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>>> Why do we need an opt-in interface instead of a way to expose which 
>>> exit's are
>>> supported by KVM? I would think the need for a TDVMCALL opt-in 
>>> interface would
>>> only come up if there was a bad guest that was making TDVMCALLs that 
>>> it did not
>>> see in GetTdVmCallInfo.
> 
> The opt-in interface can eliminate some requirements for userspace.
> E.g, for GetQuote, this patch set enforces userspace to handle the exit 
> reason
> due to GetQuote as the initial support, because KVM doesn't know if 
> userspace
> is able to handle the exit reason or not without userspace's opt-in, unless
> it's handled by default in userspace.

Beside it.

opt-in is not needed if we only care about <getquote> for now since KVM 
makes <getquote> exit to userspace unconditionally.

But to support any new TDVMCALL leaf that needs to exit userspace, we 
will have to use opt-in. So to me, implement the opt-in at the first 
place as a common interface for all the optional tdvmcall leafs instead 
of making <getquote> specific is not a bad idea to me, especially the 
opt-in implementation doesn't look complicated.

>>>   So that we would actually require an opt-in is not
>>> guaranteed.
>>>
>>> Another consideration could be how to handle GetQuote for an eventual 
>>> TDVMCALL
>>> opt-in interface, should it be needed. The problem would be GetQuote 
>>> would be
>>> opted in by default and make the interface weird. But we may not want 
>>> to have a
>>> TDVMCall specific opt-in interface. There could be other TDX 
>>> behaviors that we
>>> need to opt-in around. In which case the opt-in interface could be 
>>> more generic,
>>> and by implementing the TDVMCall opt-in interface ahead of time we 
>>> would end up
>>> with two opt-in interfaces instead of one.
> 
> Maybe we can use a TDX specific opt-in interface instead of TDVMCALL 
> specific
> interface.
> But not sure we should add it now or later.

For simplicity, I prefer separate opt-in interfaces, it makes code simpler.