On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:46:40PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> In case if it was not clear, we don't have a standalone PSP driver.
> The PSP support is provided by the CCP driver. If you look at config
> changes I proposed then it says if PSP is available then we can support
> SEV. But since PSP support is provided by the CCP driver hence we
> need to have module dependency with CCP. So, we are using your former
> expression in the dependency but have to extend it a bit more.
It doesn't matter whether the driver is standalong or not as long as you
specifically have to express explicit dependency on:
depends CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
Now that's the PSP component or whatever but as long as it has a
separate Kconfig symbol, it is the only thing that is important here.
Now, KVM_AMD_SEV needs the functionality behind CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP. So
far so good?
> We had discussion about this during our patch review process but lets
> revisit again. CCP driver manages CCP and PSP devices. Ideally the
> driver should have been called SP driver but ccp name existed well
> before we added high level SP interface. IIRC, during SP patch review it
> was recommended not to rename the driver from ccp->sp because it may
> break folks who are already using with ccp name.
>
> Here is how the config looks:
>
> +------ CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
> |
> CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD *
> (ccp.ko) | +-- ccpv3
> +------ CRYPTO_DEV_SP_CCP --|
> +-- ccpv5
> ....
Let me repeat my point more detailed again because it seems like it is
still not clear:
KVM needs SEV functionality which is behind CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP. Which
means, KVM_AMD_SEV should depend *only* on that. This is the symbol
which gives that functionality.
Now, you say "CCP driver manages CCP and PSP devices". So
CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP should select/depend on *everything* it needs in order
to function properly in order to provide that functionalty to KVM.
BUT! - and this is the key point - KVM should *not* care what PSP needs
to depend on in order to provide that functionality to KVM. PSP should
provide all that functionality itself and not rely on KVM_AMD_SEV to
select it for the PSP functionality.
IOW, you should have this:
config KVM_AMD_SEV
bool "AMD Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) support"
depends KVM_AMD && X86_64 && CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
No more symbols.
CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP should then do the proper selection so that
CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD has the proper setting wrt whether KVM is a module
or builtin. When you add CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD to the dependencies list,
you "fix" the design issue that ccp.ko is the driver which provides PSP
functionality.
I'm not sure if you could do something with a separate symbol as I
suggested earlier:
bool CRYPTO_PSP_FOR_KVM
depends on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD && CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
or so and have KVM_AMD_SEV depend on that so that you have one
indirection more which wraps the CCP and PSP dependency.
But that seems unnecessary especially since we already have
config CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
bool "Platform Security Processor (PSP) device"
default y
depends on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD && X86_64
so CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP already depends on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD!
So why should KVM_AMD_SEV depend on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD too?!? Do you
catch my drift?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
