From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61D74C48297 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 14:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rXMIM-0002x8-Sl; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:19:30 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rXMIK-0002uU-Qz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:19:28 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rXMIH-0001z6-US for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:19:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1707229165; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=J9chu5wku+L3X9QPTB+fSQGGxovjB2xXfo4JagUQgzg=; b=HacZlEuw86Q2PyeNJCxbNe22aSBt/GiHEvJbOhcaqbxHI7O85cWwV49PSshJAcC/uh/jMB cUunLOprSH3sQZYvzx28Z7XfS8QxUSxF7CyPIEQWlIPs6D+qUucKOMgZz6+7/87NtfrxQW IGHMu3zN/yJfDPuYRrepELHgxsAcruI= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-237-aRudN138Po2190E2fcy1Sg-1; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:19:21 -0500 X-MC-Unique: aRudN138Po2190E2fcy1Sg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEFC8868A21; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 14:19:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.53]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A99641103A; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 14:19:18 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 14:19:16 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Xiaoyao Li Cc: Nicholas Piggin , Daniel Henrique Barboza , =?utf-8?Q?C=C3=A9dric?= Le Goater , David Gibson , Harsh Prateek Bora , Halil Pasic , Christian Borntraeger , Eric Farman , Richard Henderson , David Hildenbrand , Ilya Leoshkevich , Thomas Huth , Paolo Bonzini , Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Confidential Guest Support: Introduce kvm_init() and kvm_reset() virtual functions Message-ID: References: <20240206082852.3333299-1-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240206082852.3333299-1-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.5 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -23 X-Spam_score: -2.4 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.294, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 03:28:48AM -0500, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > This series is inspired and suggested by Daniel: > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/ZbfoQsEuv6_zwl3b@redhat.com/ > > Currently, different confidential VMs in different architectures have > their own specific *_kvm_init() (and some have *_kvm_reset()) exposed > for KVM stuff when it's a confidential VM. e.g., sev_kmv_init() for x86 > SEV, pef_kvm_init() and pef_kvm_reset() for PPC PEF, and s390_pv_init() > for s390 PV VMs. > > Introduce a generic .kvm_init() and .kvm_reset() functions in > ConfidentialGuestSupportClass, so that different cgs technologies in > different architectures can implement their own, while common interface > of cgs can be used. > > This RFC implements two helper functions confidential_guest_kvm_init() > and confidential_guest_kvm_reset() in Patch 1. In the following patches, > they are called in arch specific implementation. X86 will benefit more > for the generic implementation when TDX support is added. > > There is one step forward possible, that calling > confidential_guest_kvm_init() before kvm_arch_init() in kvm_int() in > accel/kvm/kvm-all.c. This way, each arch doesn't need to call in their > arch specific code. > > X86 fits it, however I'm not sure if ppc and s390 fit it as well. > Because currently, ppc calls it in machine->init() > and s390 calls in MachineClass->init(). I'm not sure if there is any > order dependency. IIUC that s390 call is still a machine->init method, rather than class init. I think this series is nice, but its up to the KVM maintainers to decide... With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|