Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Aug 2023 10:32:50 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 05/14] virt: sev-guest: Add vmpck_id to snp_guest_dev struct | From | "Nikunj A. Dadhania" <> |
| |
On 8/2/2023 10:25 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 8/1/23 23:12, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote: >> On 8/1/2023 10:00 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: >>> On 7/22/23 06:19, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: >>>> Drop vmpck and os_area_msg_seqno pointers so that secret page layout >>>> does not need to be exposed to the sev-guest driver after the rework. >>>> Instead, add helper APIs to access vmpck and os_area_msg_seqno when >>>> needed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@amd.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c | 84 +++++++++++++------------ >>>> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c b/drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c >>>> index d4241048b397..8ad43e007d3b 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c >>>> @@ -50,8 +50,7 @@ struct snp_guest_dev { >>>> struct snp_secrets_page_layout *layout; >>>> struct snp_req_data input; >>>> - u32 *os_area_msg_seqno; >>>> - u8 *vmpck; >>>> + unsigned int vmpck_id; >>>> }; >>>> static u32 vmpck_id; >>>> @@ -67,12 +66,23 @@ static inline unsigned int get_ctx_authsize(struct snp_guest_dev *snp_dev) >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> -static bool is_vmpck_empty(struct snp_guest_dev *snp_dev) >>>> +static inline u8 *snp_get_vmpck(struct snp_guest_dev *snp_dev) >>>> +{ >>>> + return snp_dev->layout->vmpck0 + snp_dev->vmpck_id * VMPCK_KEY_LEN; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static inline u32 *snp_get_os_area_msg_seqno(struct snp_guest_dev *snp_dev) >>>> +{ >>>> + return &snp_dev->layout->os_area.msg_seqno_0 + snp_dev->vmpck_id; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static bool snp_is_vmpck_empty(struct snp_guest_dev *snp_dev) >>> >>> I noticed this name change from is_vmpck_empty() to snp_is_vmpck_empty(). Is that in prep for moving, too? Is so, maybe call that out in the commit message. >> >> Yes, will add to the commit. >> >>> >>>> { >>>> char zero_key[VMPCK_KEY_LEN] = {0}; >>>> + u8 *key = snp_get_vmpck(snp_dev); >>>> - if (snp_dev->vmpck) >>>> - return !memcmp(snp_dev->vmpck, zero_key, VMPCK_KEY_LEN); >>>> + if (key) >>>> + return !memcmp(key, zero_key, VMPCK_KEY_LEN); >>> >>> I believe key can't be NULL, so this check isn't required. >> >> Sure, will update. > > Ah, although I noticed that when the various functions are moved over to the other file, the key return value can be NULL, so probably not worth changing here.
I have removed the check in this patch, but the check is retained in the later patch where key can be NULL.
Regards Nikunj
| |