From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Cc: "Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@amd.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
chao.gao@intel.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com,
yan.y.zhao@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
isaku.yamahata@gmail.com, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: kvm-coco-queue: Support protected TSC
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 13:42:54 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zx+/Dl0F73GUrzI2@tpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <81e6604b-fa84-4b74-b9e6-2a37e8076fd7@intel.com>
On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 10:06:17PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On 10/26/2024 12:24 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 08:17:19PM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > > Hi Isaku,
> > >
> > > On 10/12/2024 1:25 PM, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > > > This patch series is for the kvm-coco-queue branch. The change for TDX KVM is
> > > > included at the last. The test is done by create TDX vCPU and run, get TSC
> > > > offset via vCPU device attributes and compare it with the TDX TSC OFFSET
> > > > metadata. Because the test requires the TDX KVM and TDX KVM kselftests, don't
> > > > include it in this patch series.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Background
> > > > ----------
> > > > X86 confidential computing technology defines protected guest TSC so that the
> > > > VMM can't change the TSC offset/multiplier once vCPU is initialized and the
> > > > guest can trust TSC. The SEV-SNP defines Secure TSC as optional. TDX mandates
> > > > it. The TDX module determines the TSC offset/multiplier. The VMM has to
> > > > retrieve them.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, the x86 KVM common logic tries to guess or adjust the TSC
> > > > offset/multiplier for better guest TSC and TSC interrupt latency at KVM vCPU
> > > > creation (kvm_arch_vcpu_postcreate()), vCPU migration over pCPU
> > > > (kvm_arch_vcpu_load()), vCPU TSC device attributes (kvm_arch_tsc_set_attr()) and
> > > > guest/host writing to TSC or TSC adjust MSR (kvm_set_msr_common()).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Problem
> > > > -------
> > > > The current x86 KVM implementation conflicts with protected TSC because the
> > > > VMM can't change the TSC offset/multiplier. Disable or ignore the KVM
> > > > logic to change/adjust the TSC offset/multiplier somehow.
> > > >
> > > > Because KVM emulates the TSC timer or the TSC deadline timer with the TSC
> > > > offset/multiplier, the TSC timer interrupts are injected to the guest at the
> > > > wrong time if the KVM TSC offset is different from what the TDX module
> > > > determined.
> > > >
> > > > Originally the issue was found by cyclic test of rt-test [1] as the latency in
> > > > TDX case is worse than VMX value + TDX SEAMCALL overhead. It turned out that
> > > > the KVM TSC offset is different from what the TDX module determines.
> > >
> > > Can you provide what is the exact command line to reproduce this problem ?
> >
> > Nikunj,
> >
> > Run cyclictest, on an isolated CPU, in a VM. For the maximum latency
> > metric, rather than 50us, one gets 500us at times.
> >
> > > Any links to this reported issue ?
> >
> > This was not posted publically. But its not hard to reproduce.
> >
> > > > Solution
> > > > --------
> > > > The solution is to keep the KVM TSC offset/multiplier the same as the value of
> > > > the TDX module somehow. Possible solutions are as follows.
> > > > - Skip the logic
> > > > Ignore (or don't call related functions) the request to change the TSC
> > > > offset/multiplier.
> > > > Pros
> > > > - Logically clean. This is similar to the guest_protected case.
> > > > Cons
> > > > - Needs to identify the call sites.
> > > >
> > > > - Revert the change at the hooks after TSC adjustment
> > > > x86 KVM defines the vendor hooks when the TSC offset/multiplier are
> > > > changed. The callback can revert the change.
> > > > Pros
> > > > - We don't need to care about the logic to change the TSC offset/multiplier.
> > > > Cons:
> > > > - Hacky to revert the KVM x86 common code logic.
> > > >
> > > > Choose the first one. With this patch series, SEV-SNP secure TSC can be
> > > > supported.
> > >
> > > I am not sure how will this help SNP Secure TSC, as the GUEST_TSC_OFFSET and
> > > GUEST_TSC_SCALE are only available to the guest.
> >
> > Nikunj,
> >
> > FYI:
> >
> > SEV-SNP processors (at least the one below) do not seem affected by this problem.
>
> Did you apply Secure TSC patches of (guest kernel, KVM and QEMU) manualy?
> because none of them are merged.
Yes. cyclictest latency, on a system configured with tuned
realtime-virtual-host/realtime-virtual-guest tuned profiles,
goes from 30us to 50us.
> Otherwise, I think SNP guest is still using
> KVM emulated TSC.
Not in the case the test was made.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-28 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-12 7:55 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: kvm-coco-queue: Support protected TSC Isaku Yamahata
2024-10-12 7:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Push down setting vcpu.arch.user_set_tsc Isaku Yamahata
2024-10-12 7:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: Don't allow tsc_offset, tsc_scaling_ratio to change Isaku Yamahata
2024-10-14 15:48 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-11-21 23:50 ` Isaku Yamahata
2025-03-12 12:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-03-14 0:39 ` Isaku Yamahata
2024-10-14 14:47 ` [PATCH 0/2] KVM: kvm-coco-queue: Support protected TSC Nikunj A. Dadhania
2024-10-25 16:24 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-10-27 14:06 ` Xiaoyao Li
2024-10-28 16:42 ` Marcelo Tosatti [this message]
2024-10-29 4:04 ` Nikunj A. Dadhania
2024-10-29 13:44 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2024-10-28 12:48 ` Nikunj A. Dadhania
2024-11-21 23:32 ` Isaku Yamahata
2025-03-12 1:13 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2025-03-14 0:43 ` Isaku Yamahata
2025-03-12 12:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-03-12 13:07 ` Nikunj A. Dadhania
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=Zx+/Dl0F73GUrzI2@tpad \
--to=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=isaku.yamahata@gmail.com \
--cc=isaku.yamahata@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@amd.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.com \
/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