From: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>
To: "Singh, Brijesh" <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
Cc: "libvir-list@redhat.com" <libvir-list@redhat.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"berrange@redhat.com" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"dinechin@redhat.com" <dinechin@redhat.com>,
"mkletzan@redhat.com" <mkletzan@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] AMD SEV's /dev/sev permissions and probing QEMU for capabilities
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:55:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190123125506.GA2376@beluga.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65f933a2-f63c-962f-c503-43c7e84ab5e8@amd.com>
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:51:50PM +0000, Singh, Brijesh wrote:
>
> On 1/18/19 3:39 AM, Erik Skultety wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this is a summary of a private discussion I've had with guys CC'd on this email
> > about finding a solution to [1] - basically, the default permissions on
> > /dev/sev (below) make it impossible to query for SEV platform capabilities,
> > since by default we run QEMU as qemu:qemu when probing for capabilities. It's
> > worth noting is that this is only relevant to probing, since for a proper QEMU
> > VM we create a mount namespace for the process and chown all the nodes (needs a
> > SEV fix though).
> >
> > # ll /dev/sev
> > crw-------. 1 root root
> >
> > I suggested either force running QEMU as root for probing (despite the obvious
> > security implications) or using namespaces for probing too. Dan argued that
> > this would have a significant perf impact and suggested we ask systemd to add a
> > global udev rule.
> >
> > I proceeded with cloning [1] to systemd and creating an udev rule that I planned
> > on submitting to systemd upstream - the initial idea was to mimic /dev/kvm and
> > make it world accessible to which Brijesh from AMD expressed a concern that
> > regular users might deplete the resources (limit on the number of guests
> > allowed by the platform).
>
>
> During private discussion I didn't realized that we are discussing a
> probe issue hence things I have said earlier may not be applicable
> during the probe. The /dev/sev is managed by the CCP (aka PSP) driver.
> The /dev/sev is used for communicating with the SEV FW running inside
> the PSP. The SEV FW offers platform and guest specific services. The
> guest specific services are used during the guest launch, these services
> are available through KVM driver only. Whereas the platform services can
> be invoked at anytime. A typical platform specific services are:
>
> - importing certificates
>
> - exporting certificates
>
> - querying the SEV FW version etc etc
>
> In case of the probe we are not launch SEV guest hence we should not be
> worried about depleting the SEV ASID resources.
>
> IIRC, libvirt uses QEMP query-sev-capabilities to probe the SEV support.
> QEMU executes the below sequence to complete the request:
>
> 1. Exports the platform certificates (this is when /dev/sev is accessed).
>
> 2. Read the host MSR to determine the C-bit and reduced phys-bit position
>
> I don't see any reason why we can't give world a 'read' permission to
> /dev/sev. Anyone should be able to export the certificates and query
Okay, makes sense to me. The problem I see is the sev_platform_ioctl function
in QEMU which makes an _IOWR request, therefore the file descriptor being
opened in sev_get_capabilities is O_RDWR. Now, I only understand ioctl from
what I've read in the man page, so I don't quite understand the need for IOWR
here - but my honest guess would be that it's because the commands like
SEV_PDH_CERT_EXPORT or SEV_PLATFORM_STATUS need to be copied from userspace to
kernel to instruct kernel which services we want, ergo _IOWR, is that right?
In any case, a fix of some sort needs to land in QEMU first, because no udev
rule would fix the current situation. Afterwards, I expect that having a rule
like this:
KERNEL=="sev", GROUP="kvm", MODE="0644"
and a selinux policy rule adding the kvm_device_t label, we should be fine, do
we agree on that?
> status etc. I think the main issue is reading MSR -- which I believe is
> putting a 'root' requirement. Am I missing something ?
>
>
> > But since the limit is claimed to be around 4, Dan
>
>
> FYI, the limit on EPYC is 15.
Thanks for correction.
Erik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-23 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-18 9:39 [Qemu-devel] AMD SEV's /dev/sev permissions and probing QEMU for capabilities Erik Skultety
2019-01-18 10:16 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-18 10:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] " Erik Skultety
2019-01-18 11:11 ` [Qemu-devel] " Martin Kletzander
2019-01-18 11:17 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-18 11:31 ` Martin Kletzander
2019-01-18 12:51 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-23 12:55 ` Erik Skultety [this message]
2019-01-23 13:10 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 13:22 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-23 13:24 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 13:33 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-23 13:36 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 15:02 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-23 15:29 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-29 16:15 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-29 18:40 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-30 8:06 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-30 10:37 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-30 13:39 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-30 17:47 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-30 18:18 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-31 15:28 ` Erik Skultety
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=20190123125506.GA2376@beluga.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=eskultet@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=dinechin@redhat.com \
--cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
--cc=mkletzan@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).