Re: [PATCH v15 09/20] KVM: SEV: Add support to handle MSR based Page State Change VMGEXIT

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 2:26 PM Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > It seems like TDX should be able to do something similar by limiting the
> > size of each KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE to TDX_MAP_GPA_MAX_LEN, and then
> > returning TDG_VP_VMCALL_RETRY to guest if the original size was greater
> > than TDX_MAP_GPA_MAX_LEN. But at that point you're effectively done with
> > the entire request and can return to guest, so it actually seems a little
> > more straightforward than the SNP case above. E.g. TDX has a 1:1 mapping
> > between TDG_VP_VMCALL_MAP_GPA and KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE events. (And even
> > similar names :))
> >
> > So doesn't seem like there's a good reason to expose any of these
> > throttling details to userspace,

I think userspace should never be worried about throttling. I would
say it's up to the guest to split the GPA into multiple ranges, but
that's not how arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c is implemented so instead we
can do the split in KVM instead. It can be a module parameter or VM
attribute, establishing the size that will be processed in a single
TDVMCALL.

Paolo

>
> The reasons I want to put the throttling in userspace are:
> 1. Hardcode the TDX_MAP_GPA_MAX_LEN in kernel may not be preferred.
> 2. The throttling thing doesn't need to be TDX specific, it can be
> generic in userspace.
>
> I think we can set a reasonable value in userspace, so that for SNP, it
> doesn't trigger the throttling since the large request will be split to
> multiple userspace requests.
>
>
> > in which case existing
> > KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE interface seems like it should be sufficient.
> >
> > -Mike
> >
> >>
> >>>> For TDX, it may also want to use KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE hypercall  to
> >>>> userspace via KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL.
> >>> Yes, definitely.
> >>>
> >>> Paolo
> >>>
>