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: <54871aec-823b-1ff5-8362-688d10e97263@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2022 11:11:05 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] x86/hyperv: Support hypercalls for TDX guests
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
        "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
        "ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>, "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
        "brijesh.singh@amd.com" <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "jane.chu@oracle.com" <jane.chu@oracle.com>,
        "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
        "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org>,
        "luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
        "seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "wei.liu@kernel.org" <wei.liu@kernel.org>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20221121195151.21812-1-decui@microsoft.com>
 <20221121195151.21812-6-decui@microsoft.com>
 <BYAPR21MB16886270B7899F35E8A826A4D70C9@BYAPR21MB1688.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <SA1PR21MB133528B2B3637D61368FF5FFBF139@SA1PR21MB1335.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <b692c4da-4365-196d-9d12-33e2679c01de@intel.com>
 <SA1PR21MB1335BA9D27891F6B1BA3A988BF139@SA1PR21MB1335.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <SA1PR21MB1335BA9D27891F6B1BA3A988BF139@SA1PR21MB1335.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/28/22 11:03, Dexuan Cui wrote:
...
> u64 hv_tdx_hypercall(u64 control, u64 param1, u64 param2)
> {
>         struct tdx_hypercall_args args = { };
> 
>         if (!(control & HV_HYPERCALL_FAST_BIT)) {
>                 if (param1)
>                         param1 = cc_mkdec(param1);
> 
>                 if (param2)
>                         param2 = cc_mkdec(param2);
>         }
> 
>         args.r10 = control;
>         args.rdx = param1;
>         args.r8  = param2;
> 
>         (void)__tdx_hypercall(&args, TDX_HCALL_HAS_OUTPUT);
> 
>         return args.r11;
> }

I still think this is problematic.

The cc_mkdec() should be done on the parameters when the code still
*knows* that they are addresses.

How do we know, for instance, that no hypercall using this interface
will *ever* take the 0x0 physical address as an argument?