Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] KVM: arm64: support MTE in protected VMs

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jul 19 2022, Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 7:50 AM Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 08 2022, Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > This patch series contains a proposed extension to pKVM that allows MTE
>> > to be exposed to the protected guests. It is based on the base pKVM
>> > series previously sent to the list [1] and later rebased to 5.19-rc3
>> > and uploaded to [2].
>> >
>> > This series takes precautions against host compromise of the guests
>> > via direct access to their tag storage, by preventing the host from
>> > accessing the tag storage via stage 2 page tables. The device tree
>> > must describe the physical memory address of the tag storage, if any,
>> > and the memory nodes must declare that the tag storage location is
>> > described. Otherwise, the MTE feature is disabled in protected guests.
>> >
>> > Now that we can easily do so, we also prevent the host from accessing
>> > any unmapped reserved-memory regions without a driver, as the host
>> > has no business accessing that memory.
>> >
>> > A proposed extension to the devicetree specification is available at
>> > [3], a patched version of QEMU that produces the required device tree
>> > nodes is available at [4] and a patched version of the crosvm hypervisor
>> > that enables MTE is available at [5].
>>
>> I'm unsure how this is supposed to work with QEMU + KVM, as your QEMU
>> patch adds mte-alloc properties to regions that are exposed as a
>> separate address space (which will not work with KVM). Is the magic in
>> that new shared section?
>
> Hi Cornelia,
>
> The intent is that the mte-alloc property may be set on memory whose
> allocation tag storage is not directly accessible via physical memory,
> since in this case there is no need for the hypervisor to do anything
> to protect allocation tag storage before exposing MTE to guests. In
> the case of QEMU + KVM, I would expect the emulated system to not
> expose the allocation tag storage directly, in which case it would be
> able to set mte-alloc on all memory nodes without further action,
> exactly as my patch implements for TCG. With the interface as
> proposed, QEMU would need to reject the mte-shared-alloc option when
> KVM is enabled, as there is currently no mechanism for KVM-accelerated
> virtualized tag storage.

Ok, that makes sense.

>
> Note that these properties are only relevant for guest kernels running
> under an emulated EL2 in which pKVM could conceivably run, which means
> that the host would need to implement FEAT_NV2. As far as I know there
> is currently no support for NV2 neither in QEMU TCG nor in the Linux
> kernel, and I'm unaware of any available hardware that supports both
> NV2 and MTE, so it'll be a while before any of this becomes relevant.

Nod.

I'm mostly interested because I wanted to figure out how this feature
might interact with enabling MTE for QEMU+KVM. I'll keep it in mind.

Thanks!


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel