linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] KVM: TDX: Add sub-ioctl KVM_TDX_TERMINATE

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: <aFnJdn0nHSrRoOnJ@google.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:39:02 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, 
	rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, 
	kai.huang@...el.com, reinette.chatre@...el.com, xiaoyao.li@...el.com, 
	tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com, binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com, 
	isaku.yamahata@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yan.y.zhao@...el.com, 
	chao.gao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] KVM: TDX: Add sub-ioctl KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM

On Mon, Jun 23, 2025, Vishal Annapurve wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 9:14 AM Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com> wrote:
> > Adrian's suggestion makes sense and it should be functional but I am
> > running into some issues which likely need to be resolved on the
> > userspace side. I will keep this thread updated.
> >
> > Currently testing this reboot flow:
> > 1) Issue KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM on the old VM.
> > 2) Close the VM fd.
> > 3) Create a new VM fd.
> > 4) Link the old guest_memfd handles to the new VM fd.
> > 5) Close the old guest_memfd handles.
> > 6) Register memslots on the new VM using the linked guest_memfd handles.
> >
> 
> Apparently mmap takes a refcount on backing files.

Heh, yep.

> So basically I had to modify the reboot flow as:
> 1) Issue KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM on the old VM.
> 2) Close the VM fd.
> 3) Create a new VM fd.
> 4) Link the old guest_memfd handles to the new VM fd.
> 5) Unmap the VMAs backed by the guest memfd
> 6) Close the old guest_memfd handles. -> Results in VM destruction
> 7) Setup new VMAs backed by linked guest_memfd handles.
> 8) Register memslots on the new VM using the linked guest_memfd handles.
> 
> I think the issue simply is that we have tied guest_memfd lifecycle
> with VM lifecycle and that discussion is out of scope for this patch.

I wouldn't say it's entirely out of scope.  E.g. if there's a blocking problem
_in the kernel_ that prevents utilizing KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM, then we definitely
want to sort that out before adding support for KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM.

But IIUC, the hiccups you've encountered essentially fall into the category of
"working as intended", albeit with a lot of not-so-obvious behaviors and dependencies.