lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jul]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 01/12] Documentation: kvm: Pad bullet lists with blank line
Date
There are many "unexpected indentation" warnings due to missing blank line
padding surrounding bullet lists.

One of these are reported by kernel test robot:

Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst:181: WARNING: Enumerated list ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.

Add the paddings. While at it, align TDX control flow list.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/202207050428.5xG5lJOv-lkp@intel.com/
Fixes: 9e54fa1ac03df3 ("Documentation/virtual/kvm: Document on Trust Domain Extensions(TDX)")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst
index 3fae2cf9e5341d..46ad32f3248e40 100644
--- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst
+++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/intel-tdx.rst
@@ -178,26 +178,30 @@ In addition to KVM normal flow, new TDX ioctls need to be called. The control f
looks like as follows.

#. system wide capability check
- * KVM_CAP_VM_TYPES: check if VM type is supported and if TDX_VM_TYPE is
- supported.
+
+ * KVM_CAP_VM_TYPES: check if VM type is supported and if TDX_VM_TYPE is
+ supported.

#. creating VM
- * KVM_CREATE_VM
- * KVM_TDX_CAPABILITIES: query if TDX is supported on the platform.
- * KVM_TDX_INIT_VM: pass TDX specific VM parameters.
+
+ * KVM_CREATE_VM
+ * KVM_TDX_CAPABILITIES: query if TDX is supported on the platform.
+ * KVM_TDX_INIT_VM: pass TDX specific VM parameters.

#. creating VCPU
- * KVM_CREATE_VCPU
- * KVM_TDX_INIT_VCPU: pass TDX specific VCPU parameters.
+
+ * KVM_CREATE_VCPU
+ * KVM_TDX_INIT_VCPU: pass TDX specific VCPU parameters.

#. initializing guest memory
- * allocate guest memory and initialize page same to normal KVM case
- In TDX case, parse and load TDVF into guest memory in addition.
- * KVM_TDX_INIT_MEM_REGION to add and measure guest pages.
- If the pages has contents above, those pages need to be added.
- Otherwise the contents will be lost and guest sees zero pages.
- * KVM_TDX_FINALIAZE_VM: Finalize VM and measurement
- This must be after KVM_TDX_INIT_MEM_REGION.
+
+ * allocate guest memory and initialize page same to normal KVM case
+ In TDX case, parse and load TDVF into guest memory in addition.
+ * KVM_TDX_INIT_MEM_REGION to add and measure guest pages.
+ If the pages has contents above, those pages need to be added.
+ Otherwise the contents will be lost and guest sees zero pages.
+ * KVM_TDX_FINALIAZE_VM: Finalize VM and measurement
+ This must be after KVM_TDX_INIT_MEM_REGION.

#. run vcpu

@@ -225,41 +229,58 @@ Several points to be considered.
a centralized file is acceptable.

- Wrapping kvm x86_ops: The current choice
+
Introduce dedicated file for arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c (the name,
main.c, is just chosen to show main entry points for callbacks.) and
wrapper functions around all the callbacks with
"if (is-tdx) tdx-callback() else vmx-callback()".

Pros:
+
- No major change in common x86 KVM code. The change is (mostly)
contained under arch/x86/kvm/vmx/.
- When TDX is disabled(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST=n), the overhead is
optimized out.
- Micro optimization by avoiding function pointer.
+
Cons:
+
- Many boiler plates in arch/x86/kvm/vmx/main.c.

Alternative:
+
- Introduce another callback layer under arch/x86/kvm/vmx.
+
Pros:
+
- No major change in common x86 KVM code. The change is (mostly)
contained under arch/x86/kvm/vmx/.
- clear separation on callbacks.
+
Cons:
+
- overhead in VMX even when TDX is disabled(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST=n).

- Allow per-VM kvm_x86_ops callbacks instead of global kvm_x86_ops
+
Pros:
+
- clear separation on callbacks.
+
Cons:
+
- Big change in common x86 code.
- overhead in common code even when TDX is
disabled(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST=n).

- Introduce new directory arch/x86/kvm/tdx
+
Pros:
+
- It clarifies that TDX is different from VMX.
+
Cons:
+
- Given the level of code sharing, it complicates code sharing.

KVM MMU Changes
@@ -291,26 +312,38 @@ with host(if set to 1) or private to TD(if cleared to 0).
= 51 or 47 bit set for TDX case.

Pros:
+
- Large code reuse with minimal new hooks.
- Execution path is same.
+
Cons:
+
- Complicates the existing code.
- Repurpose kvm_mmu_page as shadow of Secure-EPT can be confusing.

Alternative:
+
- Replace direct read/write on EPT entry with TDX-SEAM call by
introducing callbacks on EPT entry.
+
Pros:
+
- Straightforward.
+
Cons:
+
- Too many touching point.
- Too slow due to TDX-SEAM call.
- Overhead even when TDX is disabled(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST=n).

- Sprinkle "if (is-tdx)" for TDX special case
+
Pros:
+
- Straightforward.
+
Cons:
+
- The result is non-generic and ugly.
- Put TDX specific logic into common KVM MMU code.

@@ -320,20 +353,30 @@ Additional KVM API are needed to control TD VMs. The operations on TD
VMs are specific to TDX.

- Piggyback and repurpose KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_OP
+
Although not all operation isn't memory encryption, repupose to get
TDX specific ioctls.
+
Pros:
+
- No major change in common x86 KVM code.
+
Cons:
+
- The operations aren't actually memory encryption, but operations
on TD VMs.

Alternative:
+
- Introduce new ioctl for guest protection like
KVM_GUEST_PROTECTION_OP and introduce subcommand for TDX.
+
Pros:
+
- Clean name.
+
Cons:
+
- One more new ioctl for guest protection.
- Confusion with KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_OP with KVM_GUEST_PROTECTION_OP.

@@ -341,9 +384,13 @@ Alternative:
KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_OP as same value for user API for compatibility.
"#define KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_OP KVM_GUEST_PROTECTION_OP" for uapi
compatibility.
+
Pros:
+
- No new ioctl with more suitable name.
+
Cons:
+
- May cause confusion to the existing user program.


--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-07-09 06:22    [W:0.128 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site