public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>
To: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	"seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>,
	"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com"
	<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@intel.com>,
	"binbin.wu@linux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] x86/virt/tdx: Unbind global metadata read with 'struct tdx_tdmr_sysinfo'
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 22:40:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49dabff079d0b55bd169353d9ef159495ff2893e.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a107b067-861d-43f4-86b5-29271cb93dad@intel.com>

On Mon, 2024-08-26 at 18:38 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 7/08/24 15:09, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-08-05 at 18:13 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > Huang, Kai wrote:
> > > [..]
> > > > > The unrolled loop is the same amount of work as maintaining @fields.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Dan,
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > > 
> > > > AFAICT Dave didn't like this way:
> > > > 
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1699527082.git.kai.huang@intel.com/T/#me6f615d7845215c278753b57a0bce1162960209d
> > > 
> > > I agree with Dave that the original was unreadable. However, I also
> > > think he glossed over the loss of type-safety and the silliness of
> > > defining an array to precisely map fields only to turn around and do a
> > > runtime check that the statically defined array was filled out
> > > correctly. So I think lets solve the readability problem *and* make the
> > > array definition identical in appearance to unrolled type-safe
> > > execution, something like (UNTESTED!):
> > > 
> > > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +/*
> > > + * Assumes locally defined @ret and @ts to convey the error code and the
> > > + * 'struct tdx_tdmr_sysinfo' instance to fill out
> > > + */
> > > +#define TD_SYSINFO_MAP(_field_id, _offset)                              \
> > > +	({                                                              \
> > > +		if (ret == 0)                                           \
> > > +			ret = read_sys_metadata_field16(                \
> > > +				MD_FIELD_ID_##_field_id, &ts->_offset); \
> > > +	})
> > > +
> > 
> > We need to support u16/u32/u64 metadata field sizes, but not just u16.
> > 
> > E.g.:
> > 
> > struct tdx_sysinfo_module_info {                                        
> >         u32 sys_attributes;                                             
> >         u64 tdx_features0;                                              
> > };
> > 
> > has both u32 and u64 in one structure.
> > 
> > To achieve type-safety for all field sizes, I think we need one helper
> > for each field size.  E.g.,
> > 
> > #define READ_SYSMD_FIELD_FUNC(_size)                            \
> > static inline int                                               \
> > read_sys_metadata_field##_size(u64 field_id, u##_size *data)    \
> > {                                                               \
> >         u64 tmp;                                                \
> >         int ret;                                                \
> >                                                                 \
> >         ret = read_sys_metadata_field(field_id, &tmp);          \
> >         if (ret)                                                \
> >                 return ret;                                     \
> >                                                                 \
> >         *data = tmp;                                            \
> >         return 0;                                               \
> > }                                                                       
> > 
> > /* For now only u16/u32/u64 are needed */
> > READ_SYSMD_FIELD_FUNC(16)                                               
> > READ_SYSMD_FIELD_FUNC(32)                                               
> > READ_SYSMD_FIELD_FUNC(64)                                               
> > 
> > Is this what you were thinking?
> > 
> > (Btw, I recall that I tried this before for internal review, but AFAICT
> > Dave didn't like this.)
> > 
> > For the build time check as you replied to the next patch, I agree it's
> > better than the runtime warning check as done in the current code.
> > 
> > If we still use the type-less 'void *stbuf' function to read metadata
> > fields for all sizes, then I think we can do below:
> > 
> > /*
> >  * Read one global metadata field and store the data to a location of a 
> >  * given buffer specified by the offset and size (in bytes).            
> >  */
> > static int stbuf_read_sysmd_field(u64 field_id, void *stbuf, int offset,
> >                                   int size)                             
> > {       
> >         void *member = stbuf + offset;                                  
> >         u64 tmp;                                                        
> >         int ret;                                                        
> > 
> >         ret = read_sys_metadata_field(field_id, &tmp);                  
> >         if (ret)
> >                 return ret;                                             
> >         
> >         memcpy(member, &tmp, size);                                     
> >         
> >         return 0;                                                       
> > }                                                                       
> > 
> > /* Wrapper to read one metadata field to u8/u16/u32/u64 */              
> > #define stbuf_read_sysmd_single(_field_id, _pdata)      \
> >         stbuf_read_sysmd_field(_field_id, _pdata, 0, 	\
> > 		sizeof(typeof(*(_pdata)))) 
> > 
> > #define CHECK_MD_FIELD_SIZE(_field_id, _st, _member)    \
> >         BUILD_BUG_ON(MD_FIELD_ELE_SIZE(MD_FIELD_ID_##_field_id) != \
> >                         sizeof(_st->_member))
> > 
> > #define TD_SYSINFO_MAP_TEST(_field_id, _st, _member)                    \
> >         ({                                                              \
> >                 if (ret) {                                              \
> >                         CHECK_MD_FIELD_SIZE(_field_id, _st, _member);   \
> >                         ret = stbuf_read_sysmd_single(                  \
> >                                         MD_FIELD_ID_##_field_id,        \
> >                                         &_st->_member);                 \
> >                 }                                                       \
> >          })
> > 
> > static int get_tdx_module_info(struct tdx_sysinfo_module_info *modinfo)
> > {
> >         int ret = 0;
> > 
> > #define TD_SYSINFO_MAP_MOD_INFO(_field_id, _member)     \
> >         TD_SYSINFO_MAP_TEST(_field_id, modinfo, _member)
> > 
> >         TD_SYSINFO_MAP_MOD_INFO(SYS_ATTRIBUTES, sys_attributes);
> >         TD_SYSINFO_MAP_MOD_INFO(TDX_FEATURES0,  tdx_features0);
> > 
> >         return ret;
> > }
> > 
> > With the build time check above, I think it's OK to lose the type-safe
> > inside the stbuf_read_sysmd_field(), and the code is simpler IMHO.
> > 
> > Any comments?
> 
> BUILD_BUG_ON() requires a function, but it is still
> be possible to add a build time check in TD_SYSINFO_MAP
> e.g.
> 
> #define TD_SYSINFO_CHECK_SIZE(_field_id, _size)			\
> 	__builtin_choose_expr(MD_FIELD_ELE_SIZE(_field_id) == _size, _size, (void)0)
> 
> #define _TD_SYSINFO_MAP(_field_id, _offset, _size)		\
> 	{ .field_id = _field_id,				\
> 	  .offset   = _offset,					\
> 	  .size	    = TD_SYSINFO_CHECK_SIZE(_field_id, _size) }
> 
> #define TD_SYSINFO_MAP(_field_id, _struct, _member)		\
> 	_TD_SYSINFO_MAP(MD_FIELD_ID_##_field_id,		\
> 			offsetof(_struct, _member),		\
> 			sizeof(typeof(((_struct *)0)->_member)))
> 
> 

Thanks for the comment, but I don't think this meets for our purpose.

We want a build time "error" when the "MD_FIELD_ELE_SIZE(_field_id) == _size"
fails, but not "still initializing the size to 0".  Otherwise, we might get
some unexpected issue (due to size is 0) at runtime, which is worse IMHO than
a runtime check as done in the current upstream code.

I have been trying to add a BUILD_BUG_ON() to the field_mapping structure
initializer, but I haven't found a reliable way to do so.

For now I have completed the new version based on Dan's suggestion, but still
need to work on changelog/coverletter etc, so I think I can send the new
version out and see whether people like it.  We can revert back if that's not
what people want.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-26 22:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-17  3:40 [PATCH v2 00/10] TDX host: metadata reading tweaks, bug fix and info dump Kai Huang
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] x86/virt/tdx: Rename _offset to _member for TD_SYSINFO_MAP() macro Kai Huang
2024-08-05 22:37   ` Dan Williams
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] x86/virt/tdx: Unbind global metadata read with 'struct tdx_tdmr_sysinfo' Kai Huang
2024-08-05 23:32   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06  0:09     ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-06  1:13       ` Dan Williams
2024-08-07 12:09         ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-26 15:38           ` Adrian Hunter
2024-08-26 22:40             ` Huang, Kai [this message]
2024-08-27  4:54               ` Adrian Hunter
2024-08-27  7:22                 ` Huang, Kai
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] x86/virt/tdx: Support global metadata read for all element sizes Kai Huang
2024-08-05 23:45   ` Dan Williams
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] x86/virt/tdx: Abstract reading multiple global metadata fields as a helper Kai Huang
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] x86/virt/tdx: Move field mapping table of getting TDMR info to function local Kai Huang
2024-08-05 23:48   ` Dan Williams
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] x86/virt/tdx: Refine a comment to reflect the latest TDX spec Kai Huang
2024-08-06  3:43   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 11:23     ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-06 19:06       ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 21:01         ` Huang, Kai
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] x86/virt/tdx: Start to track all global metadata in one structure Kai Huang
2024-08-06  3:51   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 11:29     ` Huang, Kai
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] x86/virt/tdx: Print TDX module basic information Kai Huang
2024-08-06  4:19   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 11:51     ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-06 12:48       ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-07 21:56       ` Dan Williams
2024-08-07 22:32         ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-08 10:31   ` Chenyi Qiang
2024-08-08 23:52     ` Huang, Kai
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] x86/virt/tdx: Reduce TDMR's reserved areas by using CMRs to find memory holes Kai Huang
2024-08-06  4:47   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 12:17     ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-20 18:38   ` Adrian Hunter
2024-08-27  7:24     ` Huang, Kai
2024-07-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] x86/virt/tdx: Don't initialize module that doesn't support NO_RBP_MOD feature Kai Huang
2024-08-06  4:55   ` Dan Williams
2024-08-06 12:18     ` Huang, Kai
2024-08-05 12:03 ` [PATCH v2 00/10] TDX host: metadata reading tweaks, bug fix and info dump Huang, Kai
2024-08-05 22:36 ` Dan Williams
2024-08-08  0:19   ` Huang, Kai

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=49dabff079d0b55bd169353d9ef159495ff2893e.camel@intel.com \
    --to=kai.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=binbin.wu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=isaku.yamahata@intel.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox