netdev - RE: [PATCH v5 06/14] x86/ioremap: Support hypervisor specified range to map as encrypted

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: <BYAPR21MB1688452212CF8E1B97D8826DD7AB9@BYAPR21MB1688.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Feb 2023 21:15:54 +0000
From:   "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        "wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
        Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "lpieralisi@...nel.org" <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
        "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>, "kw@...ux.com" <kw@...ux.com>,
        "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "m.szyprowski@...sung.com" <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
        "thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "brijesh.singh@....com" <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
        "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        "ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        "isaku.yamahata@...el.com" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
        "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "jane.chu@...cle.com" <jane.chu@...cle.com>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 06/14] x86/ioremap: Support hypervisor specified range
 to map as encrypted

From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 1:08 PM
> 
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> > From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023
> 12:42 PM
> > >
> > > On 2/23/23 12:26, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > >> +       if (cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT)) {
> > > >> +               /*
> > > >> +               * Ensure fixmaps for IOAPIC MMIO respect memory encryption pgprot
> > > >> +               * bits, just like normal ioremap():
> > > >> +               */
> > > >> +               if (x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio(phys))
> > > >> +                       flags = pgprot_encrypted(flags);
> > > >> +               else
> > > >> +                       flags = pgprot_decrypted(flags);
> > > >> +       }
> > > ...
> > > > It does seem a bit odd that there's a new CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT
> > > > check wrapping this whole thing.  I guess the trip through
> > > > pgprot_decrypted() is harmless on normal platforms, though.
> > >
> > > Yeah, that's _really_ odd.  Sean, were you trying to optimize away the
> > > indirect call or something?
> 
> No, my thought was simply to require platforms that support GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT
> to
> implement x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio, e.g. to avoid having to check if
> is_private_mmio is NULL, to explicit document that non-Hyper-V encrypted guests
> don't (yet) support private MMIO, and to add a bit of documentation around the
> {de,en}crypted logic.
> 
> > > I would just expect the Hyper-V/vTOM code to leave
> > > x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio alone unless it *knows* the platform has
> > > private MMIO *and* CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT.
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
> > >
> > > Is there ever a case where CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT==0 and he
> > > Hyper-V/vTOM code would need to set x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio?
> >
> > There's no such case.
> >
> > I agree that gating with CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT isn't really necessary.
> > Current upstream code always does the pgprot_decrypted(), and as you said,
> > that's a no-op on platforms with no memory encryption.
> 
> Right, but since is_private_mmio can be NULL, unless I'm missing something we'll
> need an extra check no matter what, i.e. the alternative would be
> 
> 	if (x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio &&
> 	    x86_platform.hyper.is_private_mmio(phys))
> 		flags = pgprot_encrypted(flags);
> 	else
> 		flags = pgprot_decrypted(flags);
> 
> I have no objection to that approach.  It does have the advantage of not needing
> an indirect call for encrypted guests that don't support private MMIO, though
> I can't imagine this code is performance sensitive.

Or statically set a default stub function for is_private_mmio() that returns "false".
Then there's no need to check for NULL, and only platforms that want to use it
have to code anything.  Several other entries in x86_platform have such defaults.

Michael