From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>,
Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:18:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190409191827.2dcc2402.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190409125416.73713f23@oc2783563651>
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:54:16 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:16:47 +0200
> Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:13 +0200
> > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On s390 protected virtualization guests also have to use bounce I/O
> > > buffers. That requires some plumbing.
> > >
> > > Let us make sure any device using DMA API accordingly is spared from the
> ^, ^,
> Maybe this helps...
>
> > > problems that hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared secure page would
> > > bring.
> >
> > I have problems parsing this sentence :(
> >
> > Do you mean that we want to exclude pages for I/O from encryption?
>
> The intended meaning is:
> * Devices that do use DMA API (properly) to get get/map the memory
> that is used to talk to hypervisor should be OK with PV (protected
> virtualizaton). I.e. for such devices PV or not PV is basically
> transparent.
> * But if a device does not use DMA API for the memory that is used to
> talk to the hypervisor this patch won't help.
>
> And yes the gist of it is: memory accessed by the hypervisor needs to
> be on pages excluded from protection (which in case of PV is technically
> not encryption).
>
> Does that help?
Hm, let me sleep on this. The original sentence was a bit too
convoluted for me...
>
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/s390/Kconfig | 4 ++++
> > > arch/s390/include/asm/Kbuild | 1 -
> > > arch/s390/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 13 +++++++++++
> > > arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h | 18 +++++++++++++++
> > > arch/s390/mm/init.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 5 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> > > create mode 100644 arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
> >
> > (...)
> >
> > > @@ -126,6 +129,45 @@ void mark_rodata_ro(void)
> > > pr_info("Write protected read-only-after-init data: %luk\n", size >> 10);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > > +{
> > > + /* also called for the swiotlb bounce buffers, make all pages shared */
> > > + /* TODO: do ultravisor calls */
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted);
> > > +
> > > +int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > > +{
> > > + /* also called for the swiotlb bounce buffers, make all pages shared */
> > > + /* TODO: do ultravisor calls */
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted);
> > > +
> > > +/* are we a protected virtualization guest? */
> > > +bool sev_active(void)
> > > +{
> > > + /*
> > > + * TODO: Do proper detection using ultravisor, for now let us fake we
> > > + * have it so the code gets exercised.
> >
> > That's the swiotlb stuff, right?
> >
>
> You mean 'That' == code to get exercised == 'swiotlb stuff'?
>
> If yes then the answer is kind of. The swiotlb (i.e. bounce buffers) is
> when we map (like we map the buffers pointed to by the descriptors in
> case of the virtio ring). The other part of it is the memory allocated
> as DMA coherent (i.e. the virtio ring (desc, avail used) itself).
Ok.
>
> > (The patches will obviously need some reordering before it is actually
> > getting merged.)
> >
>
> What do you mean by reordering?
>
> One reason why this is an early RFC is the missing dependency (i.e. the
> stuff described by most of the TODO comments). As pointed out in the
> cover letter. Another reason is that I wanted to avoid putting a lots of
> effort into fine-polishing before clarifying the getting some feedback
> on the basics from the community. ;)
Sure. I'm just reading top-down and unconditionally enabling this is
something that obviously needs to be changed in later iterations ;)
>
>
> > > + */
> > > + return true;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active);
> > > +
> > > +/* protected virtualization */
> > > +static void pv_init(void)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!sev_active())
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + /* make sure bounce buffers are shared */
> > > + swiotlb_init(1);
> > > + swiotlb_update_mem_attributes();
> > > + swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_FORCE;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > void __init mem_init(void)
> > > {
> > > cpumask_set_cpu(0, &init_mm.context.cpu_attach_mask);
> > > @@ -134,6 +176,8 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
> > > set_max_mapnr(max_low_pfn);
> > > high_memory = (void *) __va(max_low_pfn * PAGE_SIZE);
> > >
> > > + pv_init();
> > > +
> > > /* Setup guest page hinting */
> > > cmma_init();
> > >
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-09 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190404231622.52531-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-2-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-08 11:01 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] virtio/s390: use vring_create_virtqueue Cornelia Huck
2019-04-08 12:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-3-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 9:57 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190409132927.5df3bc50@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 13:01 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190409152313.0296e8f1@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 15:47 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-4-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 10:16 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190409125416.73713f23@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 17:18 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-04-09 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-8-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-10 8:42 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410164245.53f8b26d@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:21 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-11-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-10 8:46 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] virtio/s390: consolidate DMA allocations Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410171254.71206015@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:36 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410194849.511ecc46@oc2783563651>
2019-04-11 9:24 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-10 9:20 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410175750.0ed0a454@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:24 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-6-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 17:55 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] s390/cio: add protected virtualization support to cio Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410021044.4da3e847@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 8:25 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410150225.61b86cd9@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:16 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 14:15 ` Sebastian Ott
[not found] ` <20190404231622.52531-5-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
2019-04-09 10:44 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] s390/cio: introduce cio DMA pool Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190409141114.7dcce94a@oc2783563651>
2019-04-09 17:14 ` Cornelia Huck
[not found] ` <20190410173148.067555dc@oc2783563651>
2019-04-10 16:07 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-11 18:25 ` Sebastian Ott
[not found] ` <20190412132010.3c74cb63@oc2783563651>
2019-04-12 12:12 ` Sebastian Ott
[not found] ` <20190412173017.04b768bb@oc2783563651>
2019-04-16 12:50 ` Sebastian Ott
2019-04-12 13:47 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization David Hildenbrand
[not found] ` <20190416131005.6f3e05eb@oc2783563651>
2019-04-16 11:50 ` David Hildenbrand
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=20190409191827.2dcc2402.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mihajlov@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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).