Thread (12 messages) 12 messages, 3 authors, 2021-06-11

Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] x86/sev-es: Disable IRQs while GHCB is active

From: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
Date: 2021-06-11 14:20:43
Also in: kvm, linux-coco, lkml

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 04:05:15PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:11:37AM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Why not simply "sandwich" them:

	local_irq_save()
	sev_es_get_ghcb()

	...blablabla

	sev_es_put_ghcb()
	local_irq_restore();

in every call site?
I am not a fan of this, because its easily forgotten to add
local_irq_save()/local_irq_restore() calls around those. Yes, we can add
irqs_disabled() assertions to the functions, but we can as well just
disable/enable IRQs in them. Only the previous value of EFLAGS.IF needs
to be carried from one function to the other.
Hmm, so why aren't you accessing/setting data->ghcb_active and
data->backup_ghcb_active safely using cmpxchg() if this path can be
interrupted by an NMI?
Using cmpxchg is not necessary here. It is all per-cpu data, so local to
the current cpu. If an NMI happens anywhere in sev_es_get_ghcb() it can
still use the GHCB, because the interrupted #VC handler will not start
writing to it before sev_es_get_ghcb() returned.

Problems only come up when one path starts writing to the GHCB, but that
happens long after it is marked active.

Regards,

	Joerg
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help