From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Sami Mujawar <sami.mujawar@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
Alper Gun <alpergun@google.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/11] virt: arm-cca-guest: TSM_REPORT support for realms
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 15:41:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3ce0718-064d-48e4-a681-7058157127b0@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11cff100-3406-4608-9993-c29caf3d086d@arm.com>
On 14/10/2024 09:56, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 12/10/2024 07:06, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> On 10/12/24 2:22 AM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>> On 11/10/2024 15:14, Steven Price wrote:
>>>> On 08/10/2024 05:12, Gavin Shan wrote:
>>>>> On 10/5/24 12:43 AM, Steven Price wrote:
>>>>>> From: Sami Mujawar <sami.mujawar@arm.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Introduce an arm-cca-guest driver that registers with
>>>>>> the configfs-tsm module to provide user interfaces for
>>>>>> retrieving an attestation token.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a new report is requested the arm-cca-guest driver
>>>>>> invokes the appropriate RSI interfaces to query an
>>>>>> attestation token.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The steps to retrieve an attestation token are as follows:
>>>>>> 1. Mount the configfs filesystem if not already mounted
>>>>>> mount -t configfs none /sys/kernel/config
>>>>>> 2. Generate an attestation token
>>>>>> report=/sys/kernel/config/tsm/report/report0
>>>>>> mkdir $report
>>>>>> dd if=/dev/urandom bs=64 count=1 > $report/inblob
>>>>>> hexdump -C $report/outblob
>>>>>> rmdir $report
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sami Mujawar <sami.mujawar@arm.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v3: Minor improvements to comments and adapt to the renaming of
>>>>>> GRANULE_SIZE to RSI_GRANULE_SIZE.
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/virt/coco/Kconfig | 2 +
>>>>>> drivers/virt/coco/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>>> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/Kconfig | 11 +
>>>>>> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/Makefile | 2 +
>>>>>> .../virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/arm-cca-guest.c | 211
>>>>>> ++++++++++++ ++++++
>>>>>> 5 files changed, 227 insertions(+)
>>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/Kconfig
>>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/Makefile
>>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-guest/arm-cca-guest.c
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>> + * arm_cca_report_new - Generate a new attestation token.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * @report: pointer to the TSM report context information.
>>>>>> + * @data: pointer to the context specific data for this module.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * Initialise the attestation token generation using the
>>>>>> challenge data
>>>>>> + * passed in the TSM descriptor. Allocate memory for the attestation
>>>>>> token
>>>>>> + * and schedule calls to retrieve the attestation token on the
>>>>>> same CPU
>>>>>> + * on which the attestation token generation was initialised.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * The challenge data must be at least 32 bytes and no more than 64
>>>>>> bytes. If
>>>>>> + * less than 64 bytes are provided it will be zero padded to 64
>>>>>> bytes.
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * Return:
>>>>>> + * * %0 - Attestation token generated successfully.
>>>>>> + * * %-EINVAL - A parameter was not valid.
>>>>>> + * * %-ENOMEM - Out of memory.
>>>>>> + * * %-EFAULT - Failed to get IPA for memory page(s).
>>>>>> + * * A negative status code as returned by
>>>>>> smp_call_function_single().
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +static int arm_cca_report_new(struct tsm_report *report, void *data)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>>> + long max_size;
>>>>>> + unsigned long token_size;
>>>>>> + struct arm_cca_token_info info;
>>>>>> + void *buf;
>>>>>> + u8 *token __free(kvfree) = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct tsm_desc *desc = &report->desc;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!report)
>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> This check seems unnecessary and can be dropped.
>>>>
>>>> Ack
>>>>
>>>>>> + if (desc->inblob_len < 32 || desc->inblob_len > 64)
>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * Get a CPU on which the attestation token generation will be
>>>>>> + * scheduled and initialise the attestation token generation.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + cpu = get_cpu();
>>>>>> + max_size = rsi_attestation_token_init(desc->inblob,
>>>>>> desc->inblob_len);
>>>>>> + put_cpu();
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that put_cpu() is called early, meaning the CPU can go
>>>>> away before
>>>>> the subsequent call to arm_cca_attestation_continue() ?
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, good spot. I'll move it to the end of the function and update
>>>> the error paths below.
>>>
>>> Actually this was on purpose, not to block the CPU hotplug. The
>>> attestation must be completed on the same CPU.
>>>
>>> We can detect the failure from "smp_call" further down and make sure
>>> we can safely complete the operation or restart it.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, It's fine to call put_cpu() early since we're tolerant to error
>> introduced
>> by CPU unplug. It's a bit confused that rsi_attestation_token_init()
>> is called
>> on the local CPU while arm_cca_attestation_continue() is called on
>> same CPU
>> with help of smp_call_function_single(). Does it make sense to unify
>> so that
>> both will be invoked with the help of smp_call_function_single() ?
>>
>> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>
>> /*
>> * The calling and target CPU can be different after the calling
>> process
>> * is migrated to another different CPU. It's guaranteed the
>> attestatation
>> * always happen on the target CPU with smp_call_function_single().
>> */
>> ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu,
>> rsi_attestation_token_init_wrapper,
>> (void *)&info, true);
>
> Well, we want to allocate sufficient size buffer (size returned from
> token_init()) outside an atomic context (thus not in smp_call_function()).
>
> May be we could make this "allocation" restriction in a comment to
> make it clear, why we do it this way.
So if I've followed this correctly the get_cpu() route doesn't work
because of the need to allocate outblob. So using
smp_call_function_single() for all calls seems to be the best approach,
along with a comment explaining what's going on. So how about:
/*
* The attestation token 'init' and 'continue' calls must be
* performed on the same CPU. smp_call_function_single() is used
* instead of simply calling get_cpu() because of the need to
* allocate outblob based on the returned value from the 'init'
* call and that cannot be done in an atomic context.
*/
cpu = smp_processor_id();
info.challenge = desc->inblob;
info.challenge_size = desc->inblob_len;
ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu, arm_cca_attestation_init,
&info, true);
if (ret)
return ret;
max_size = info.result;
(with appropriate updates to the 'info' struct and a new
arm_cca_attestation_init() wrapper for rsi_attestation_token_init()).
Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-14 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-04 14:42 [PATCH v6 00/11] arm64: Support for running as a guest in Arm CCA Steven Price
2024-10-04 14:42 ` [PATCH v6 01/11] arm64: rsi: Add RSI definitions Steven Price
2024-10-07 23:08 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 14:14 ` Steven Price
2024-10-04 14:42 ` [PATCH v6 02/11] arm64: Detect if in a realm and set RIPAS RAM Steven Price
2024-10-04 15:05 ` Steven Price
2024-10-11 13:12 ` Catalin Marinas
2024-10-07 23:31 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 14:14 ` Steven Price
2024-10-04 14:42 ` [PATCH v6 03/11] arm64: realm: Query IPA size from the RMM Steven Price
2024-10-07 23:33 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-15 3:55 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-15 9:08 ` Steven Price
2024-10-04 14:42 ` [PATCH v6 04/11] arm64: rsi: Add support for checking whether an MMIO is protected Steven Price
2024-10-08 0:24 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 14:14 ` Steven Price
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 05/11] arm64: rsi: Map unprotected MMIO as decrypted Steven Price
2024-10-08 0:31 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 13:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2024-10-12 5:22 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 13:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 06/11] efi: arm64: Map Device with Prot Shared Steven Price
2024-10-08 0:31 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 13:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 07/11] arm64: Enforce bounce buffers for realm DMA Steven Price
2024-10-08 2:51 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 08/11] arm64: mm: Avoid TLBI when marking pages as valid Steven Price
2024-10-08 2:52 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-15 9:50 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 09/11] arm64: Enable memory encrypt for Realms Steven Price
2024-10-08 2:56 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 10/11] virt: arm-cca-guest: TSM_REPORT support for realms Steven Price
2024-10-05 15:42 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-08 4:12 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-11 14:14 ` Steven Price
2024-10-11 16:22 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2024-10-12 6:06 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-14 8:56 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2024-10-14 14:41 ` Steven Price [this message]
2024-10-14 14:46 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2024-10-15 0:01 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-04 14:43 ` [PATCH v6 11/11] arm64: Document Arm Confidential Compute Steven Price
2024-10-08 4:17 ` Gavin Shan
2024-10-08 11:05 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2024-10-11 14:14 ` Steven Price
2024-10-15 9:55 ` Suzuki K Poulose
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=f3ce0718-064d-48e4-a681-7058157127b0@arm.com \
--to=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=alpergun@google.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=sami.mujawar@arm.com \
--cc=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).