From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 499D7C19F2D for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:42:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C2FD16B0073; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 07:42:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id BB7916B0074; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 07:42:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A31888E0001; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 07:42:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD606B0073 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 07:42:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D30BA0EC9 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:42:53 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79779867426.06.DB1A74E Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by imf07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF5CA40153 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:42:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1660045372; x=1691581372; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=k+q8/MfB6T1wOsTh6u+efttkxB0NTXmq/yeTF+WM02Y=; b=HAk7S9Iz4i/A6Bk8W7ecMnYo9s2HBwndLKYBGooel2hXAHvUt7Ipe2LS Q0OwLapsM9n1E//QVnm9xGGkLwusEen/X3qZK6l/jN2Vl0JsmgbkTrkww bFRg9LLa8sXThmBFttctaA3iEWapH2wFq/6pMxetgrvAasO2m6PVsEFS1 SJbK1yVlInmOMWn6F85IXYoPFH4LuReUyvAnE6v/CopHNiXHoYObzlRbR VYqft+fDeutox833PNRu+1lg4tVOzoZPQFsgAApmYyakCoPKEX63p/F6V wq7DYrp6IpAbEf+HqhZt2osvzgwaP/VNRwI6Gm5q0hcOZVkHlbGCWuYjc A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10433"; a="288378590" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,224,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="288378590" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2022 04:42:51 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,224,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="707796787" Received: from labukara-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO box.shutemov.name) ([10.251.214.212]) by fmsmga002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2022 04:42:45 -0700 Received: by box.shutemov.name (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 867B1103886; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 14:45:44 +0300 (+03) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 14:45:44 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Sean Christopherson , Andrew Morton , Joerg Roedel , Ard Biesheuvel , Andi Kleen , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , David Rientjes , Vlastimil Babka , Tom Lendacky , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Paolo Bonzini , Ingo Molnar , Varad Gautam , Dario Faggioli , Dave Hansen , Mike Rapoport , David Hildenbrand , marcelo.cerri@canonical.com, tim.gardner@canonical.com, khalid.elmously@canonical.com, philip.cox@canonical.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 14/14] x86/tdx: Add unaccepted memory support Message-ID: <20220809114544.q4f7cetqgv2gj5tx@box.shutemov.name> References: <20220614120231.48165-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20220614120231.48165-15-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1660045373; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=mWlMqAQlRZ+5Qch9o9c2/xZD9gnvsI8wMbLRSrgxYSA=; b=5XTKNwNS/t6dwpn5OcFvODm91JTAsSxSEBZ8dnK5i5XrJpG2k2ERavrjGXmgTrEtaVneCT /hy9yBqX8a0s1KKGf8Mr/E/5Kls3dl3OgmRcpnYd9dDCnS20EfGt21/bh8CC61gC3Vzqr4 FvHeB440CoGAHIy7/Kpos1t6LS6txeY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf07.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=HAk7S9Iz; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF" header.from=intel.com (policy=none); spf=none (imf07.hostedemail.com: domain of kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 192.55.52.93) smtp.mailfrom=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1660045373; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=iXKgcOf3Oo4RANChLlvQPJ7lcymLncbDNFwMcy8A/8VbjYSKHUnBdVTWrBYpj3STZ+bxyK 74QkRVO0AFlw+0k/wxM0fzVdFeKf1U6pLaZFU6VUXnre5gK+Qrv5QLikfAmE23GrFnHqBw P8hLE0ptwbWaPU0Poe5XGf6VIQlNPRM= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AF5CA40153 Authentication-Results: imf07.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=HAk7S9Iz; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF" header.from=intel.com (policy=none); spf=none (imf07.hostedemail.com: domain of kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 192.55.52.93) smtp.mailfrom=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Stat-Signature: 37co634iqu99jr176jrs4pim7esrhwca X-HE-Tag: 1660045372-690735 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 04:51:16PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 03:02:31PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > +static bool is_tdx_guest(void) > > +{ > > + static bool once; > > + static bool is_tdx; > > + > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_GUEST)) > > + return false; > > + > > + if (!once) { > > + u32 eax, sig[3]; > > + > > + cpuid_count(TDX_CPUID_LEAF_ID, 0, &eax, > > + &sig[0], &sig[2], &sig[1]); > > + is_tdx = !memcmp(TDX_IDENT, sig, sizeof(sig)); > > + once = true; > > + } > > + > > + return is_tdx; > > +} > > early_tdx_detect() already calls this CPUID function. It assigns > function pointers too. > > So why can't you assign an accept_memory() function pointer there and > get rid of this sprinkled if (tdx) everywhere? This code called from EFI stub which runs before decompressor code and therefore before early_tdx_detect(). > > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c > > index 918a7606f53c..8518a75e5dd5 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c > > @@ -3,12 +3,15 @@ > > #include "../cpuflags.h" > > #include "../string.h" > > #include "../io.h" > > +#include "align.h" > > #include "error.h" > > +#include "pgtable_types.h" > > > > #include > > #include > > > > #include > > +#include > > > > /* Called from __tdx_hypercall() for unrecoverable failure */ > > void __tdx_hypercall_failed(void) > > @@ -75,3 +78,78 @@ void early_tdx_detect(void) > > pio_ops.f_outb = tdx_outb; > > pio_ops.f_outw = tdx_outw; > > } > > + > > +static unsigned long try_accept_one(phys_addr_t start, unsigned long len, > > + enum pg_level level) > > That's pretty much a copy of the same function in arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c. > > Yeah, you need a tdx-shared.c which you include in both places just like > it is done with sev-shared.c Okay, will look into this. > > + accept_size = try_accept_one(start, len, PG_LEVEL_1G); > > + if (!accept_size) > > + accept_size = try_accept_one(start, len, PG_LEVEL_2M); > > + if (!accept_size) > > + accept_size = try_accept_one(start, len, PG_LEVEL_4K); > > + if (!accept_size) > > + error("Accepting memory failed\n"); > > + start += accept_size; > > This series of calls to try_accept_one() appear in at least three > places. Please carve them out into a separate function can put it in > tdx-shared.c. Okay. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov