qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 4/5] s390x/pv: Introduce a s390_pv_check() helper for runtime


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] s390x/pv: Introduce a s390_pv_check() helper for runtime
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2023 13:33:30 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0

On 04/01/2023 12.51, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com>

If a secure kernel is started in a non-protected VM, the OS will hang
during boot without giving a proper error message to the user.

Perform the checks on Confidential Guest support at runtime with an
helper called from the service call switching the guest to protected
mode.

Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com>
---
  include/hw/s390x/pv.h |  2 ++
  hw/s390x/pv.c         | 14 ++++++++++++++
  target/s390x/diag.c   |  7 +++++++
  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/pv.h b/include/hw/s390x/pv.h
index 9360aa1091..ca7dac2e20 100644
--- a/include/hw/s390x/pv.h
+++ b/include/hw/s390x/pv.h
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ int kvm_s390_dump_init(void);
  int kvm_s390_dump_cpu(S390CPU *cpu, void *buff);
  int kvm_s390_dump_mem_state(uint64_t addr, size_t len, void *dest);
  int kvm_s390_dump_completion_data(void *buff);
+bool s390_pv_check(Error **errp);
  #else /* CONFIG_KVM */
  static inline bool s390_is_pv(void) { return false; }
  static inline int s390_pv_query_info(void) { return 0; }
@@ -75,6 +76,7 @@ static inline int kvm_s390_dump_cpu(S390CPU *cpu, void *buff) 
{ return 0; }
  static inline int kvm_s390_dump_mem_state(uint64_t addr, size_t len,
                                            void *dest) { return 0; }
  static inline int kvm_s390_dump_completion_data(void *buff) { return 0; }
+static inline bool s390_pv_check(Error **errp) { return false; }
  #endif /* CONFIG_KVM */
int s390_pv_kvm_init(ConfidentialGuestSupport *cgs, Error **errp);
diff --git a/hw/s390x/pv.c b/hw/s390x/pv.c
index 8d0d3f4adc..96c0728ec9 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/pv.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/pv.c
@@ -307,6 +307,20 @@ static bool s390_pv_guest_check(const Object *obj, Error 
**errp)
      return s390_pv_check_cpus(errp) && s390_pv_check_host(errp);
  }
+bool s390_pv_check(Error **errp)
+{
+    MachineState *ms = MACHINE(qdev_get_machine());
+    Object *obj = OBJECT(ms->cgs);
+
+    if (!obj) {
+        error_setg(errp, "Protected VM started without a Confidential"
+                   " Guest support interface");
+        return false;
+    }
+
+    return s390_pv_guest_check(obj, errp);
+}
+
  OBJECT_DEFINE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES(S390PVGuest,
                                     s390_pv_guest,
                                     S390_PV_GUEST,
diff --git a/target/s390x/diag.c b/target/s390x/diag.c
index 76b01dcd68..9b16e25930 100644
--- a/target/s390x/diag.c
+++ b/target/s390x/diag.c
@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ void handle_diag_308(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t r1, 
uint64_t r3, uintptr_t ra)
      uint64_t addr =  env->regs[r1];
      uint64_t subcode = env->regs[r3];
      IplParameterBlock *iplb;
+    Error *local_err = NULL;
if (env->psw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE) {
          s390_program_interrupt(env, PGM_PRIVILEGED, ra);
@@ -176,6 +177,12 @@ out:
              return;
          }
+ if (!s390_pv_check(&local_err)) {
+            error_report_err(local_err);
+            env->regs[r1 + 1] = DIAG_308_RC_INVAL_FOR_PV;

I hope someone from IBM can double-check whether that return code is fine in this case here.

If so, the patch looks fine to me.

 Thomas


+            return;
+        }
+
          s390_ipl_reset_request(cs, S390_RESET_PV);
          break;
      default:




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]