On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:27 PM Krish Sadhukhan
<krish.sadhukhan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/29/20 11:21 PM, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> > From: Brijesh Singh <Brijesh.Singh@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > The command finalize the guest receiving process and make the SEV guest
> > ready for the execution.
> >
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: x86@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > .../virt/kvm/amd-memory-encryption.rst | 8 +++++++
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/amd-memory-encryption.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/amd-memory-encryption.rst
> > index 554aa33a99cc..93cd95d9a6c0 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/amd-memory-encryption.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/amd-memory-encryption.rst
> > @@ -375,6 +375,14 @@ Returns: 0 on success, -negative on error
> > __u32 trans_len;
> > };
> >
> > +15. KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_FINISH
> > +------------------------
> > +
> > +After completion of the migration flow, the KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_FINISH command can be
> > +issued by the hypervisor to make the guest ready for execution.
> > +
> > +Returns: 0 on success, -negative on error
> > +
> > References
> > ==========
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > index 5fc5355536d7..7c2721e18b06 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> > @@ -7573,6 +7573,26 @@ static int sev_receive_update_data(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_sev_cmd *argp)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +static int sev_receive_finish(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_sev_cmd *argp)
> > +{
> > + struct kvm_sev_info *sev = &to_kvm_svm(kvm)->sev_info;
> > + struct sev_data_receive_finish *data;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (!sev_guest(kvm))
> > + return -ENOTTY;
> > +
> > + data = kzalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!data)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + data->handle = sev->handle;
> > + ret = sev_issue_cmd(kvm, SEV_CMD_RECEIVE_FINISH, data, &argp->error);
> > +
> > + kfree(data);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int svm_mem_enc_op(struct kvm *kvm, void __user *argp)
> > {
> > struct kvm_sev_cmd sev_cmd;
> > @@ -7632,6 +7652,9 @@ static int svm_mem_enc_op(struct kvm *kvm, void __user *argp)
> > case KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_UPDATE_DATA:
> > r = sev_receive_update_data(kvm, &sev_cmd);
> > break;
> > + case KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_FINISH:
> > + r = sev_receive_finish(kvm, &sev_cmd);
> > + break;
> > default:
> > r = -EINVAL;
> > goto out;
> Reviewed-by: Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@xxxxxxxxxx>
As to ENOTTY, man page for ioctl translates it as "The specified
request does not apply to the kind of object that the file descriptor
fd references", which seems appropriate here.
Reviewed-by: Steve Rutherford <srutherford@xxxxxxxxxx>
