Re: [PATCH v10 005/108] KVM: TDX: Initialize the TDX module when loading the KVM intel kernel module

[Isaku Yamahata]

On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 01:29:46AM +0000,
"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> > +
> > +#define TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS					\
> > +	((sizeof(struct tdsysinfo_struct) -				\
> > +		offsetof(struct tdsysinfo_struct, cpuid_configs))	\
> > +		/ sizeof(struct tdx_cpuid_config))
> > +
> > +struct tdx_capabilities {
> > +	u8 tdcs_nr_pages;
> > +	u8 tdvpx_nr_pages;
> > +
> > +	u64 attrs_fixed0;
> > +	u64 attrs_fixed1;
> > +	u64 xfam_fixed0;
> > +	u64 xfam_fixed1;
> > +
> > +	u32 nr_cpuid_configs;
> > +	struct tdx_cpuid_config cpuid_configs[TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS];
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* Capabilities of KVM + the TDX module. */
> > +static struct tdx_capabilities tdx_caps;
> 
> I think you can introduce this tdx_capabilities in another patch.
> 
> As claimed this patch can just focus on initializing the TDX module.  Whether
> you need this tdx_capabilities or tdx_sysinfo is enough can be done in the patch
> when they are really needed.  It makes review easier otherwise people won't be
> able to tell why tdx_capabilities is needed here.

Ok, the previous patch ("x86/virt/tdx: Add a helper function to return
system wide info about TDX module ") and this part will be moved right before the
first use of tdx_caps. "KVM: TDX: create/destroy VM structure"


> > +
> > +static int __init tdx_module_setup(void)
> > +{
> > +	const struct tdsysinfo_struct *tdsysinfo;
> > +	int ret = 0;
> > +
> > +	BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*tdsysinfo) != 1024);
> > +	BUILD_BUG_ON(TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS != 37);
> > +
> > +	ret = tdx_enable();
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		pr_info("Failed to initialize TDX module.\n");
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	tdsysinfo = tdx_get_sysinfo();
> > +	if (tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config > TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS)
> > +		return -EIO;
> > +
> > +	tdx_caps = (struct tdx_capabilities) {
> > +		.tdcs_nr_pages = tdsysinfo->tdcs_base_size / PAGE_SIZE,
> > +		/*
> > +		 * TDVPS = TDVPR(4K page) + TDVPX(multiple 4K pages).
> > +		 * -1 for TDVPR.
> > +		 */
> > +		.tdvpx_nr_pages = tdsysinfo->tdvps_base_size / PAGE_SIZE - 1,
> > +		.attrs_fixed0 = tdsysinfo->attributes_fixed0,
> > +		.attrs_fixed1 = tdsysinfo->attributes_fixed1,
> > +		.xfam_fixed0 =	tdsysinfo->xfam_fixed0,
> > +		.xfam_fixed1 = tdsysinfo->xfam_fixed1,
> > +		.nr_cpuid_configs = tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config,
> > +	};
> > +	if (!memcpy(tdx_caps.cpuid_configs, tdsysinfo->cpuid_configs,
> > +			tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config *
> > +			sizeof(struct tdx_cpuid_config)))
> > +		return -EIO;
> > +
> > +	pr_info("kvm: TDX is supported. x86 phys bits %d\n",
> > +		boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits);
> 
> What''s the benefit of print out x86_phys_bits?  Looks a little bit weird here.
> 
> TDX host code will print out TDX private KeyID range.  I think that is useful
> enough?

Ok, please make TDX host code print it.  I will remove key id rane.


> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int __init tdx_hardware_setup(struct kvm_x86_ops *x86_ops)
> > +{
> > +	int r;
> > +
> > +	if (!enable_ept) {
> > +		pr_warn("Cannot enable TDX with EPT disabled\n");
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/* MOVDIR64B instruction is needed. */
> > +	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MOVDIR64B)) {
> > +		pr_warn("Cannot enable TDX with MOVDIR64B supported ");
> 					   ^
> 					   without
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +	}
> 
> I think you should explain why MOVDIR64B is required, otherwise this just comes
> out of blue.
> 
> Btw, is this absolutely required?  TDX also supports Li-mode, which doesn't have
> integrity check.  So theoretically with Li-mode, normal zeroing is also OK but
> doesn't need to use MOVDIR64B.
> 
> That being said, do we have a way to tell whether TDX works in Ci or Li mode?

As long as I don't know.  When clearing page, we can use
if (featuremovdir64b) movdir64b else memset(0).

-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>