On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 01:29:46AM +0000, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > + > > +#define TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS \ > > + ((sizeof(struct tdsysinfo_struct) - \ > > + offsetof(struct tdsysinfo_struct, cpuid_configs)) \ > > + / sizeof(struct tdx_cpuid_config)) > > + > > +struct tdx_capabilities { > > + u8 tdcs_nr_pages; > > + u8 tdvpx_nr_pages; > > + > > + u64 attrs_fixed0; > > + u64 attrs_fixed1; > > + u64 xfam_fixed0; > > + u64 xfam_fixed1; > > + > > + u32 nr_cpuid_configs; > > + struct tdx_cpuid_config cpuid_configs[TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS]; > > +}; > > + > > +/* Capabilities of KVM + the TDX module. */ > > +static struct tdx_capabilities tdx_caps; > > I think you can introduce this tdx_capabilities in another patch. > > As claimed this patch can just focus on initializing the TDX module. Whether > you need this tdx_capabilities or tdx_sysinfo is enough can be done in the patch > when they are really needed. It makes review easier otherwise people won't be > able to tell why tdx_capabilities is needed here. Ok, the previous patch ("x86/virt/tdx: Add a helper function to return system wide info about TDX module ") and this part will be moved right before the first use of tdx_caps. "KVM: TDX: create/destroy VM structure" > > + > > +static int __init tdx_module_setup(void) > > +{ > > + const struct tdsysinfo_struct *tdsysinfo; > > + int ret = 0; > > + > > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*tdsysinfo) != 1024); > > + BUILD_BUG_ON(TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS != 37); > > + > > + ret = tdx_enable(); > > + if (ret) { > > + pr_info("Failed to initialize TDX module.\n"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > + tdsysinfo = tdx_get_sysinfo(); > > + if (tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config > TDX_MAX_NR_CPUID_CONFIGS) > > + return -EIO; > > + > > + tdx_caps = (struct tdx_capabilities) { > > + .tdcs_nr_pages = tdsysinfo->tdcs_base_size / PAGE_SIZE, > > + /* > > + * TDVPS = TDVPR(4K page) + TDVPX(multiple 4K pages). > > + * -1 for TDVPR. > > + */ > > + .tdvpx_nr_pages = tdsysinfo->tdvps_base_size / PAGE_SIZE - 1, > > + .attrs_fixed0 = tdsysinfo->attributes_fixed0, > > + .attrs_fixed1 = tdsysinfo->attributes_fixed1, > > + .xfam_fixed0 = tdsysinfo->xfam_fixed0, > > + .xfam_fixed1 = tdsysinfo->xfam_fixed1, > > + .nr_cpuid_configs = tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config, > > + }; > > + if (!memcpy(tdx_caps.cpuid_configs, tdsysinfo->cpuid_configs, > > + tdsysinfo->num_cpuid_config * > > + sizeof(struct tdx_cpuid_config))) > > + return -EIO; > > + > > + pr_info("kvm: TDX is supported. x86 phys bits %d\n", > > + boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits); > > What''s the benefit of print out x86_phys_bits? Looks a little bit weird here. > > TDX host code will print out TDX private KeyID range. I think that is useful > enough? Ok, please make TDX host code print it. I will remove key id rane. > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +int __init tdx_hardware_setup(struct kvm_x86_ops *x86_ops) > > +{ > > + int r; > > + > > + if (!enable_ept) { > > + pr_warn("Cannot enable TDX with EPT disabled\n"); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + /* MOVDIR64B instruction is needed. */ > > + if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MOVDIR64B)) { > > + pr_warn("Cannot enable TDX with MOVDIR64B supported "); > ^ > without > > + return -ENODEV; > > + } > > I think you should explain why MOVDIR64B is required, otherwise this just comes > out of blue. > > Btw, is this absolutely required? TDX also supports Li-mode, which doesn't have > integrity check. So theoretically with Li-mode, normal zeroing is also OK but > doesn't need to use MOVDIR64B. > > That being said, do we have a way to tell whether TDX works in Ci or Li mode? As long as I don't know. When clearing page, we can use if (featuremovdir64b) movdir64b else memset(0). -- Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>