On 11/16/21 12:23 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:58:12AM -0500, Tyler Fanelli wrote:
On 11/16/21 10:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 10:29:35AM -0500, Tyler Fanelli wrote:
On 11/16/21 4:17 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 02:38:04PM -0500, Tyler Fanelli wrote:
Probe for SEV-ES and SEV-SNP capabilities to distinguish between Rome,
Naples, and Milan processors. Use the CPUID function to probe if a
processor is capable of running SEV-ES or SEV-SNP, rather than if it
actually is running SEV-ES or SEV-SNP.
Signed-off-by: Tyler Fanelli <tfanelli@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
qapi/misc-target.json | 11 +++++++++--
target/i386/sev.c | 6 ++++--
2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/qapi/misc-target.json b/qapi/misc-target.json
index 5aa2b95b7d..c3e9bce12b 100644
--- a/qapi/misc-target.json
+++ b/qapi/misc-target.json
@@ -182,13 +182,19 @@
# @reduced-phys-bits: Number of physical Address bit reduction when SEV is
# enabled
#
+# @es: SEV-ES capability of the machine.
+#
+# @snp: SEV-SNP capability of the machine.
+#
# Since: 2.12
##
{ 'struct': 'SevCapability',
'data': { 'pdh': 'str',
'cert-chain': 'str',
'cbitpos': 'int',
- 'reduced-phys-bits': 'int'},
+ 'reduced-phys-bits': 'int',
+ 'es': 'bool',
+ 'snp': 'bool'},
'if': 'TARGET_I386' }
##
@@ -205,7 +211,8 @@
#
# -> { "execute": "query-sev-capabilities" }
# <- { "return": { "pdh": "8CCDD8DDD", "cert-chain": "888CCCDDDEE",
-# "cbitpos": 47, "reduced-phys-bits": 5}}
+# "cbitpos": 47, "reduced-phys-bits": 5
+# "es": false, "snp": false}}
We've previously had patches posted to support SNP in QEMU
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-08/msg04761.html
and this included an update to query-sev for reporting info
about the VM instance.
Your patch is updating query-sev-capabilities, which is a
counterpart for detecting host capabilities separate from
a guest instance.
Yes, that's because with this patch, I'm more interested in determining
which AMD processor is running on a host, and less if ES or SNP is actually
running on a guest instance or not.
None the less I wonder if the same design questions from
query-sev apply. ie do we need to have the ability to
report any SNP specific information fields, if so we need
to use a discriminated union of structs, not just bool
flags.
More generally I'm some what wary of adding this to
query-sev-capabilities at all, unless it is part of the
main SEV-SNP series.
Also what's the intended usage for the mgmt app from just
having these boolean fields ? Are they other more explicit
feature flags we should be reporting, instead of what are
essentially SEV generation codenames.
If by "mgmt app" you're referring to sevctl, in order to determine which
certificate chain to use (Naples vs Rome vs Milan ARK/ASK) we must query
which processor we are running on. Although sevctl has a feature which can
do this already, we cannot guarantee that sevctl is running on the same host
that a VM is running on, so we must query this capability from QEMU. My
logic was determining the processor would have been the following:
I'm not really talking about a specific, rather any tool which wants
to deal with SEV and QEMU, whether libvirt or an app using libvirt,
or something else using QEMU directly.
Ah, my mistake.
Where does the actual cert chain payload come from ? Is that something
the app has to acquire out of band, or can the full cert chain be
acquired from the hardware itself ?
The cert chain (or the ARK/ASK specifically) comes from AMD's KDS, yet
sevctl is able to cache the values, and has them on-hand when needed. This
patch would tell sevctl *which* of the cert chains to use (Naples vs Rome vs
Milan chain). If need be, I could just focus on Naples and Rome processors
for now and bring support for SNP (Milan processors) later on when it is
more mature.
!es && !snp --> Naples
es && !snp --> Rome
es && snp --> Milan
This approach isn't future proof if subsequent generations introduce
new certs. It feels like we should be explicitly reporting something
about the certs rather than relying on every app to re-implement tihs
logic.
Alright, like an encoding of which processor generation the host is running
on?
IIUC (from looking at sev-tool), the certificates can be acquired
from
https://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/ask_ark_{gen}.cert
where {gen} is one of "milan", "naples", "rome".
With this in mind, I'd think that query-sev-capabilities could just
report the required certificate name. e.g.
{ 'enum': 'SevAskArkCertName',
'data': ['milan', 'naples', 'rome'] }
and then report it in SevCapability struct with
"ask-ark-cert-name": "SevAskArkCertName"
That seems reasonable to me, I'll give it a try and submit a v2 patch.
Regards,
Daniel
--
Tyler Fanelli (tfanelli)
