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;
Date:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 14:45:22 +0800
From:   Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
        "Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        jun.nakajima@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        david@redhat.com, aarcange@redhat.com, ddutile@redhat.com,
        dhildenb@redhat.com, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>, mhocko@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] KVM: Extend the memslot to support fd-based
 private memory
Message-ID: <20220614064522.GA1783435@chaop.bj.intel.com>
Reply-To: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
References: <20220519153713.819591-1-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
 <20220519153713.819591-5-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
 <8840b360-cdb2-244c-bfb6-9a0e7306c188@kernel.org>
 <YofeZps9YXgtP3f1@google.com>
 <20220523132154.GA947536@chaop.bj.intel.com>
 <YoumuHUmgM6TH20S@google.com>
 <20220530132613.GA1200843@chaop.bj.intel.com>
 <YqNt3Sgzge5Rph/R@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YqNt3Sgzge5Rph/R@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 04:14:21PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2022, Chao Peng wrote:
> > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 03:22:32PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Actually, if the semantics are that userspace declares memory as private, then we
> > > can reuse KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION and KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_UNREG_REGION.  It'd
> > > be a little gross because we'd need to slightly redefine the semantics for TDX, SNP,
> > > and software-protected VM types, e.g. the ioctls() currently require a pre-exisitng
> > > memslot.  But I think it'd work...
> > 
> > These existing ioctls looks good for TDX and probably SNP as well. For
> > softrware-protected VM types, it may not be enough. Maybe for the first
> > step we can reuse this for all hardware based solutions and invent new
> > interface when software-protected solution gets really supported.
> > 
> > There is semantics difference for fd-based private memory. Current above
> > two ioctls() use userspace addreess(hva) while for fd-based it should be
> > fd+offset, and probably it's better to use gpa in this case. Then we
> > will need change existing semantics and break backward-compatibility.
> 
> My thought was to keep the existing semantics for VMs with type==0, i.e. SEV and
> SEV-ES VMs.  It's a bit gross, but the pinning behavior is a dead end for SNP and
> TDX, so it effectively needs to be deprecated anyways. 

Yes agreed.

> I'm definitely not opposed
> to a new ioctl if Paolo or others think this is too awful, but burning an ioctl
> for this seems wasteful.

Yes, I also feel confortable if it's acceptable to reuse kvm_enc_region
to pass _gpa_ range for this new type.

> 
> Then generic KVM can do something like:
> 
> 	case KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION:
> 	case KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_UNREG_REGION:
> 		struct kvm_enc_region region;
> 
> 		if (!kvm_arch_vm_supports_private_memslots(kvm))
> 			goto arch_vm_ioctl;
> 
> 		r = -EFAULT;
> 		if (copy_from_user(&region, argp, sizeof(region)))
> 			goto out;
> 
> 		r = kvm_set_encrypted_region(ioctl, &region);
> 		break;
> 	default:
> arch_vm_ioctl:
> 		r = kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(filp, ioctl, arg);
> 
> 
> where common KVM provides
> 
>   __weak void kvm_arch_vm_supports_private_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)
>   {
> 	return false;
>   }

I already had kvm_arch_private_mem_supported() introduced in patch-07
so that can be reused.

> 
> and x86 overrides that to
> 
>   bool kvm_arch_vm_supports_private_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)
>   {
>   	/* I can't remember what we decided on calling type '0' VMs. */
> 	return !!kvm->vm_type;
>   }
> 
> and if someone ever wants to enable private memslot for SEV/SEV-ES guests we can
> always add a capability or even a new VM type.
> 
> pKVM on arm can then obviously implement kvm_arch_vm_supports_private_memslots()
> to grab whatever identifies a pKVM VM.