Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <c75ffa6b-181b-bc4c-9fee-5476cfbc329a@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 11:35:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/tdx: Handle load_unaligned_zeropad() page-cross to a
 shared page
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
        luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        dan.j.williams@intel.com, david@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220517153021.11116-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <e73cb19e-7dab-2fc1-b947-fac70fd607d2@intel.com>
 <20220517174042.v6s7wm3u5j2ebaoq@black.fi.intel.com>
 <c761e774-8014-6fa9-cf21-e7cd8f7aca54@intel.com>
 <20220517201710.ixbpsaga5jzvokvy@black.fi.intel.com>
 <083519ab-752f-9815-7741-22b3fcc03322@intel.com>
 <YoQkTtrMiU2bff9i@google.com> <YoQnQIfX8GuOgKqH@google.com>
 <20220519181958.libitxp2jws4prcr@black.fi.intel.com>
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220519181958.libitxp2jws4prcr@black.fi.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/19/22 11:19, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>> The SDM has a breakdown:
>>>>
>>>> 	27.2.5 Information for VM Exits Due to Instruction Execution
>>>>
>>>> I didn't realize it came from VMREAD.  I guess I assumed it came from
>>>> some TDX module magic.  Silly me.
>>>>
>>>> The SDM makes it sound like we should be more judicious about using
>>>> 've->instr_len' though.  "All VM exits other than those listed in the
>>>> above items leave this field undefined."  Looking over
>>>> virt_exception_kernel(), we've got five cases from CPU instructions that
>>>> cause unconditional VMEXITs:
>> Ideally, what the SDM says wouldn't matter at all.  The TDX module spec really
>> should be the authorative source in this case, but it just punts to the SDM:
>>
>>   The 32-bit value that would have been saved into the VMCS as VM-exit instruction
>>   length if a legacy VM exit had occurred instead of the virtualization exception.
>>
>> Even if the TDX spec wants to punt to the SDM, it would save a lot of headache and
>> SDM reading if it also said something to the effect of:
>>
>>   The INSTRUCTION_LENGTH and INSTRUCTION_INFORMATION fields are valid for all
>>   #VEs injected by the Intel TDX Module.  The fields are undefined for #VEs
>>   injected by the CPU due to EPT Violations.
> I initiated update to the spec, but it will take time.

Understood, and thanks for doing that.

For now, let's just declare what we *expect* the spec will say and show
it to the folks doing the spec itself.  They will then have a chance to
balk at our interpretation if we got something wrong.