Message-ID: <b13cdd98-52b7-f70b-5aad-5f8ca6413bc0@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:47:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: SEV: Return appropriate error codes if SEV-ES
 scratch setup fails
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20211109222350.2266045-1-seanjc@google.com>
 <20211109222350.2266045-2-seanjc@google.com>
 <fc56edb6-5154-4532-242f-4acb8b448330@amd.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <fc56edb6-5154-4532-242f-4acb8b448330@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/11/21 16:14, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> 
>> Return appropriate error codes if setting up the GHCB scratch area for an
>> SEV-ES guest fails.  In particular, returning -EINVAL instead of -ENOMEM
>> when allocating the kernel buffer could be confusing as userspace would
>> likely suspect a guest issue.
> 
> Based on previous feedback and to implement the changes to the GHCB 
> specification, I'm planning on submitting a patch that will return an 
> error code back to the guest, instead of terminating the guest, if the 
> scratch area fails to be setup properly. So you could hold off on this 
> patch if you want.

I think we still want these two patches in 5.16.

Paolo