Re: [libvirt PATCH 0/5] Support AMD SEV firmware with -bios instead of pflash

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

 



On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 02:16:14PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 07:07:10PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > The firmware distros have given people for use with AMD SEV thus far has
> > just been one of the regular OVMF builds. This is sufficient for booting
> > a guest with SEV enabled, but is useless if you want to actually
> > validate the guest measurement. The NVRAM store is untrustworthy since
> > it is not included in the measurement. We need to supply a dedicated
> > build of OVMF without NVRAM support enabled. While it is possible to
> > use with pflash, we then get a problem with firmware selection as there
> > is no easy way to make it prefer the firmware without NVRAM. Also the
> > firmware descriptor treats the NVRAM template as a mandatory field
> > today and libvirt enforces that.
> > 
> > While we could invent a new feature flag 'sev-stateless' for the
> > firmware descriptors, and/or make the NVRAM template path optional,
> > it makes more sense if the firmware descriptor just reports the SEV
> > firmware as type=memory instead of type=flash.
> > 
> > If the libvirt XML parses the <loader type='rom'/> attribute when
> > doing firmware auto-selection, we trivially enable a way for a mgmt
> > app to indicate that it wants the SEV firmware without NVRAM
> > support.
> > 
> > This series does all the plumbing we need.
> > 
> > The only minor issue is that QEMU support for -bios with SEV enabled
> > firmware is broken:
> > 
> >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2022-01/msg02957.html
> 
> Well turns out the concept is unfixably broken on the QEMU side
> with SEV enabled UEFI firmware. So I'm going to ditch the first
> docs patch.
> 
> I figure it is still possibly useful to be able to controla
> auto-firmware selection based on 'type', even if it doesn't
> help my sev use case, so might as well leave keep that now
> I've implemented it.

In any case, in context of patch 2/5, shouldn't autoselect haven been left
untouched and instead pick the type automatically, say in
qemuValidateDomainDefBoot or similar depending on whether the domain has
LaunchSecurity SEV defined in the XML?

Erik




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux