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;
Cc:     brijesh.singh@amd.com, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        "Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] KVM: SVM: Add KVM_SEV SEND_START command
To:     Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
References: <20190710201244.25195-1-brijesh.singh@amd.com>
 <20190710201244.25195-2-brijesh.singh@amd.com>
 <CAMkAt6pzXrZw1TZgcX-G0wDNZBjf=1bQdErAJTxfzYQ2MJDZvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4f509f43-a576-144d-efd4-ab0362f1d667@amd.com>
 <CAMkAt6qfPyqGuNv9gKirote=zj6Vha=9Vu1HSFkxx334s-GV1g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
Message-ID: <a1c99bbc-b30f-53b0-6598-545d05b18e1c@amd.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:06:51 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMkAt6qfPyqGuNv9gKirote=zj6Vha=9Vu1HSFkxx334s-GV1g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: amd.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 095c8699-32f1-4129-7ad7-08d76cf9bb1e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Nov 2019 14:06:54.4933
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 3dd8961f-e488-4e60-8e11-a82d994e183d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: sg4YdveydHjJ54uEDLK+mXdQlBo86x1KbVqo3CfFbfNOeOBfjK4xSx4GoQMBGPJbANGVlWzZyV3vh93jKRM5cw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR12MB4267
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


On 11/14/19 1:27 PM, Peter Gonda wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 2:27 PM Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/12/19 12:35 PM, Peter Gonda wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:13 PM Singh, Brijesh <brijesh.singh@amd.com> wrote:
>>>> +static int sev_send_start(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_sev_cmd *argp)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       struct kvm_sev_info *sev = &to_kvm_svm(kvm)->sev_info;
>>>> +       void *amd_cert = NULL, *session_data = NULL;
>>>> +       void *pdh_cert = NULL, *plat_cert = NULL;
>>>> +       struct sev_data_send_start *data = NULL;
>>>> +       struct kvm_sev_send_start params;
>>>> +       int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (!sev_guest(kvm))
>>>> +               return -ENOTTY;
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (copy_from_user(&params, (void __user *)(uintptr_t)argp->data,
>>>> +                               sizeof(struct kvm_sev_send_start)))
>>>> +               return -EFAULT;
>>>> +
>>>> +       data = kzalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> +       if (!data)
>>>> +               return -ENOMEM;
>>>> +
>>>> +       /* userspace wants to query the session length */
>>>> +       if (!params.session_len)
>>>> +               goto cmd;
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (!params.pdh_cert_uaddr || !params.pdh_cert_len ||
>>>> +           !params.session_uaddr)
>>>> +               return -EINVAL;
>>> I think pdh_cert is only required if the guest policy SEV bit is set.
>>> Can pdh_cert be optional?
>>
>>
>> We don't cache the policy information in kernel, having said so we can
>> try caching it during the LAUNCH_START to optimize this case. I have to
>> check with FW folks but I believe all those fields are required. IIRC,
>> When I passed NULL then SEND_START failed for me. But I double check it
>> and update you on this.
> 
> 
> I must have misinterpreted the this line of the spec:
> "If GCTX.POLICY.SEV is 1, the PDH, PEK, CEK, ASK, and ARK certificates
> are validated."
> I thought that since they were not validated they were not needed.
> 

I have confirmed that these fields are required by the SEND_START
even when GCTX.POLICY.SEV=0. The FW needs us to pass certificate
chain, if POLICY.SEV=1 then FW will validating the chain otherwise
ignore it.