Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 21 Jan 2023 18:05:22 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 2/3] x86/sev: Change snp_guest_issue_request's fw_err |
| |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 09:48:55PM +0000, Dionna Glaze wrote: > The GHCB specification declares that the firmware error value for a > guest request will be stored in the lower 32 bits of EXIT_INFO_2. > The upper 32 bits are for the VMM's own error code. The fw_err argument > is thus a misnomer, and callers will need access to all 64 bits. > > The type of unsigned long also causes problems, since sw_exit_info2 is > u64 (unsigned long long) vs the argument's unsigned long*. This type > is changed for issuing the guest request. The ioctl command struct's > error field is passed directly instead of a local variable, since an > incomplete guest request may not set the error code, and uninitialized > stack memory would be written back to user space. > > The firmware might not even be called, so the call is bookended with > the no firmware call error and clearing the error. > > Since the "fw_err" field is really exitinfo2 split into the upper bits' > vmm error code and lower bits' firmware error code, sev-guest.h is > updated to represent the 64 bit value as a union. > > Cc: Tom Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > Cc: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > Cc: Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <Borislav.Petkov@amd.com> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> > Cc: Venu Busireddy <venu.busireddy@oracle.com> > Cc: Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com> > Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> > Cc: Michael Sterritt <sterritt@google.com> > > Fixes: d5af44dde546 ("x86/sev: Provide support for SNP guest request NAEs") > Reviewed-by: Tom Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <Borislav.Petkov@amd.com>
Please don't add tags you haven't received. Especially a Reviewed-by. Have a look here what they mean, if unsure:
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
I've removed it - you don't have to resend just because of that.
Thx.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
|  |