Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp1078593yba; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:44:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxzneITixozho6skOx5DzCx8jHQtCifQg10mJUPLWViRpYkiDoBrKN/FomqgVXFqEne8Te+ X-Received: by 2002:a63:cc0d:: with SMTP id x13mr45566802pgf.280.1556311477265; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:44:37 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1556311477; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=l+xYlrt5mX4wL4FCFRIb38nd4pwEHods/qmkSS5ZEot90HpZ9FhFIuwMSd/2OcXS2j Ti7zgUOZNY0vWcnE/Kx/c4DSjV0nR4jJd39MYz7wt9eysHVDSaIC08Ka3vaoKLHtV4UA X+HMLsvcrhjlVzrYm6f/+Pmgxxm78oXhMxff5aPokfHhfLsCExTFnF/0owOrsGoWmtSx GhRv9pnPOkdpcuB51SIRE9EVt2pPzphlvOBUJN78Q912bjmsZmk1GHACbsLLEewAvxwB jbM3SZO9njf3RuyZiLIOMaA9A1sFtySXsRXCUf9YhkAEp3Z8IzaEbQ7g+CzmjbKctM3l 7kgQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=U/CTz5SAE+pabViqpyUk1tFxQ7Z2FiMtt9crX5ZBuxU=; b=KOoZh9lRSxckPHxegmUnjGs7u9i4gW93bEH8UEA7slvCW1r45LwNXZcWKvLh0YRwum Oox65HLUCPr8X3Gy2yYkgIOiU/An9vwwkHYuZUfRvNySxCsaHFRmCp3H7r17pGUJUWnY EGjvJIHBN8LgU5lLQNp64CErg/B4CcO8fwU/blSamDew+lj8qdV1Wh0fIb6KadMJqr25 HayldlD33aIsOP4YUEVcaO4P1MF1VyxbAZHmmoCy0R0T3hty9wPFSGjEnTYJeahKQxAk LoqU17hja+46lqobEUsyB5DGkT9Kv2hh84oQCWBaMsJ5o14tiMBbd7Q17lcDPyAmwJUc 0AIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@alien8.de header.s=dkim header.b=UhdPGQOL; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alien8.de Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z143si27731712pfc.64.2019.04.26.13.44.21; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:44:37 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@alien8.de header.s=dkim header.b=UhdPGQOL; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alien8.de Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726505AbfDZUna (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:43:30 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:39724 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725966AbfDZUn3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:43:29 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2F0E4E00943B2A4E3B498EBE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0e:4e00:943b:2a4e:3b49:8ebe]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id E91221EC0380; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:43:27 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1556311408; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=U/CTz5SAE+pabViqpyUk1tFxQ7Z2FiMtt9crX5ZBuxU=; b=UhdPGQOLrAf8IGQf0LFY/S4cUffWG3c4g9ftiz6gJMEqqlTKDul2WnVMT5615oZgOgXDnJ ++VBWOsicl1sJqsDfbbe8zvCah3EZWOKI05JbmK2U00zXthBByudvMSRKV7SFtwhqV+Miv zO7NC654c1E1HbrUsIITY8nVh74sj4g= Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:43:27 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Singh, Brijesh" Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Joerg Roedel , "Lendacky, Thomas" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 01/10] KVM: SVM: Add KVM_SEV SEND_START command Message-ID: <20190426204327.GM4608@zn.tnic> References: <20190424160942.13567-1-brijesh.singh@amd.com> <20190424160942.13567-2-brijesh.singh@amd.com> <20190426141042.GF4608@zn.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 02:29:31PM +0000, Singh, Brijesh wrote: > Yes that's doable but I am afraid that caching the value may lead us to > wrong path and also divergence from the SEV API spec. The spec says the > returned length is a minimum length but its possible that caller can > give a bigger buffer and FW will still work with it. Does the caller even have a valid reason to give a bigger buffer len? I mean I'm still thinking defensively here but maybe the only thing that would happen here with a bigger buffer is if the kmalloc() would fail, leading to eventual failure of the migration. If the code limits the allocation to some sane max length, the migration won't fail even if userspace gives it too big values... -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.