From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/15] pci: Add pci_iomap_shared{,_range} Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 05:12:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20210824050842-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20210805005218.2912076-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <20210805005218.2912076-12-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <20210823195409-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <26a3cce5-ddf7-cbe6-a41e-58a2aea48f78@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1629796332; h=from:from: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=UO2zBbBs1G6uT3R3xch5pdAd9JzMFmQCenqYTZnnAws=; b=ciI55oT+4ry/YlJLlDbugRTfprdq8vmV8TxkKb01viiPuKkCGhO804W14LS76wuqUuE+pJ KfuZCRH8vytOEwSgN/ZVJOTN8ffYpvEEqlTWk9AnsTrzYcdsb0W9dwj/0mW756MhXE+X9y cur4x82RiyCts6/Ze32mfLqL6/9yMes= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <26a3cce5-ddf7-cbe6-a41e-58a2aea48f78@linux.intel.com> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Andy Lutomirski , Bjorn Helgaas , Richard Henderson , Thomas Bogendoerfer , James E J Bottomley , Helge Deller , "David S . Miller" , Arnd Bergmann , Jonathan Corbet , Peter H Anvin , Dave Hansen , Tony Luck , Dan Williams , Andi Kleen , Kirill Shutemov , Sean Christopherson On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 05:30:54PM -0700, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote: > > > On 8/23/21 4:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Add a new variant of pci_iomap for mapping all PCI resources > > > of a devices as shared memory with a hypervisor in a confidential > > > guest. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen > > > Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan > > I'm a bit puzzled by this part. So why should the guest*not* map > > pci memory as shared? And if the answer is never (as it seems to be) > > then why not just make regular pci_iomap DTRT? > > It is in the context of confidential guest (where VMM is un-trusted). So > we don't want to make all PCI resource as shared. It should be allowed > only for hardened drivers/devices. I can't say this answers the question at all. PCI devices are part of the VMM and so un-trusted. In particular PCI devices do not have the key to decrypt memory. Therefore as far as I can see PCI resources should not be encrypted. I conclude they all should be marked shared. If I'm wrong can you please give an example of a PCI resource that is encrypted? -- MST