Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:16:06 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@linux.intel.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 02/19] mm: Do not use zero page in encrypted pages
Message-ID: <20180719071606.dkeq5btz5wlzk4oq@kshutemo-mobl1>
References: <20180717112029.42378-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20180717112029.42378-3-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <e09c67ab-38a7-5b76-29e6-a45627eec1e5@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e09c67ab-38a7-5b76-29e6-a45627eec1e5@intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180622
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:36:24AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 07/17/2018 04:20 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Zero page is not encrypted and putting it into encrypted VMA produces
> > garbage.
> > 
> > We can map zero page with KeyID-0 into an encrypted VMA, but this would
> > be violation security boundary between encryption domains.
> 
> Why?  How is it a violation?
> 
> It only matters if they write secrets.  They can't write secrets to the
> zero page.

I believe usage of zero page is wrong here. It would indirectly reveal
content of supposedly encrypted memory region.

I can see argument why it should be okay and I don't have very strong
opinion on this.

If folks see it's okay to use zero page in encrypted VMAs I can certainly
make it work.

> Is this only because you accidentally inherited ->vm_page_prot on the
> zero page PTE?

Yes, in previous patchset I mapped zero page with wrong KeyID. This is one
of possible fixes for this.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov