Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD5DC433F5 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 19:37:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245636AbhLATlH (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:41:07 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33790 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239157AbhLATlB (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:41:01 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4830FC061574; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:37:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id 71so24691639pgb.4; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:37:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2pQR4NmCSaxcgp6K9YVXVHlggEsM7Bp75xK/vJqmsa0=; b=JGtt7aFtGVaGBNVoM5LP+n2i55DPMQv3JN/bKvjlOrjjtGEOzhdDHL7Pb8h9mu/7Cu mkLhCxVGFlwTIc5DEvc9HpCIAuf8zIYygEuqrBz0RcD8bBViQeYNFQlqBaTdJCmBCJbN o+74+3yf5GO3Xiu5EO/NLLu5bZdkWg+gnMVWC3pH+VfngCEA9d4A9qvfW1/fbWVgDBVs 7VF7aTuntdE0b3uiULHKWH3NN6m56r2r6dzdp8OjZGXtZrxveuDmuuRDMyYgXvm/iBB5 iDVdirUqPy1mzh8jgk+qK2Bfy8shbOZVULsvjG48jHLQqp3IP8Jagd9GwmFUEZAQajoe w47A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2pQR4NmCSaxcgp6K9YVXVHlggEsM7Bp75xK/vJqmsa0=; b=OKngJl7o7JG37ueuQ+JNn+L/QXVFwcIFQSOo9hmww9jFl1YlJBVSxCqzsKmWeAx9Go 1XDMcaqgMTkrY2CR9ier9tnM7ubumEZHbHZRQmkDbXniW5R2aLiaxnP2DOMm46wujlXt S9ygratm21kyRu0dh21xliV7YUSK8WFrjmKFZ1twthWk/iYd7Ung90m1jDkOLRZL71et 277Q4Pi8KY3cmqB5rl8XkUwGZFLFHinPLA7O+QXMVTqP2ZFGbECNyiy4QCk1FmeIZn7X NcTcRkYuJHLbnSpMf3t2hdZdN8UIhaIPbzUcnxhHYCce1cLgWMz6Kk7hkdGNi5ierfOA 8+2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533k0LKMGTXnys8PlHdpdDuSyNcG5LMSoIzkM5Dvhi0EFgD8C9PW OzJ2+/aU6mlNCi5TwcQtKrA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHXcCwmQKA5iVtujrmdj750ZdrGnnPFT9YbWf3XHCcFPS3qqtpS5+jKg2Bip0m4SVWlJOXEA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:904a:: with SMTP id a71mr6278803pge.528.1638387458755; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:37:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2601:647:4600:a5:6f71:8916:71a8:8af8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e4sm418588pgi.21.2021.12.01.11.37.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:37:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:37:37 -0800 From: Isaku Yamahata To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Thomas Gleixner , isaku.yamahata@intel.com, Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H . Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , erdemaktas@google.com, Connor Kuehl , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com, Sean Christopherson , Xiaoyao Li Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 14/59] KVM: x86: Add vm_type to differentiate legacy VMs from protected VMs Message-ID: <20211201193737.GB1166703@private.email.ne.jp> References: <60a163e818b9101dce94973a2b44662ba3d53f97.1637799475.git.isaku.yamahata@intel.com> <87tug0jbno.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 05:35:34PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 24 2021 at 16:19, isaku yamahata wrote: > > > From: Sean Christopherson > > > > > > Add a capability to effectively allow userspace to query what VM types > > > are supported by KVM. > > > > I really don't see why this has to be named legacy. There are enough > > reasonable use cases which are perfectly fine using the non-encrypted > > muck. Just because there is a new hyped feature does not make anything > > else legacy. > > Yeah, this was brought up in the past. The current proposal is to use > KVM_X86_DEFAULT_VM[1], though at one point the plan was to use a generic > KVM_VM_TYPE_DEFAULT for all architectures[2], not sure what happened to that idea. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/YY6aqVkHNEfEp990@google.com/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/YQsjQ5aJokV1HZ8N@google.com/ Currently _{unsupported, disallowed} are added and the check is sprinkled and warn in the corresponding low level tdx code. It helped to detect dubious behavior of guest or qemu. The other approach is to silently ignore them (SMI, INIT, IRQ etc) without such check. The pros is, the code would be simpler and it's what SEV does today. the cons is, it would bes hard to track down such cases and the user would be confused. For example, when user requests reset/SMI, it's silently ignored. The some check would still be needed. Any thoughts? -- Isaku Yamahata