Re: [PATCH 07/10] x86/tdx: Extend TDX_MODULE_CALL to support more TDCALL/SEAMCALL leafs

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Jul 13 2023 - 06:38:06 EST


On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 10:19:49AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-07-13 at 10:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 08:02:54AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry I am ignorant here. Won't "clearing ECX only" leave high bits of
> > > registers still containing guest's value?
> >
> > architecture zero-extends 32bit stores
>
> Sorry, where can I find this information? Looking at SDM I couldn't find :-(

Yeah, I couldn't find it in a hurry either, but bpetkov pasted me this
from the AMD document:

"In 64-bit mode, the following general rules apply to instructions and their operands:
“Promoted to 64 Bit”: If an instruction’s operand size (16-bit or 32-bit) in legacy and
compatibility modes depends on the CS.D bit and the operand-size override prefix, then the
operand-size choices in 64-bit mode are extended from 16-bit and 32-bit to include 64 bits (with a
REX prefix), or the operand size is fixed at 64 bits. Such instructions are said to be “Promoted to
64 bits” in Table B-1. However, byte-operand opcodes of such instructions are not promoted."

> I _think_ I understand now? In 64-bit mode
>
> xor %eax, %eax
>
> equals to
>
> xor %rax, %rax
>
> (due to "architecture zero-extends 32bit stores")
>
> Thus using the former (plus using "d" for %r*) can save some memory?

Yes, 64bit wide instruction get a REX prefix 0x4X (somehow I keep typing
RAX) byte in front to tell it's a 64bit wide op.

31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
48 31 c0 xor %rax,%rax

The REX byte will show up for rN usage, because then we need the actual
Register Extention part of that prefix irrespective of the width.

45 31 d2 xor %r10d,%r10d
4d 31 d2 xor %r10,%r10

x86 instruction encoding is 'fun' :-)

See SDM Vol 2 2.2.1.2 if you want to know more about the REX prefix.