On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 5:20 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 02:47:31PM -0700, Peter Gonda wrote:
> > > > + * certificate data buffer retry the same guest request without the
> > > > + * extended data request.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (exit_code == SVM_VMGEXIT_EXT_GUEST_REQUEST &&
> > > > + err == SNP_GUEST_REQ_INVALID_LEN) {
> > > > + const unsigned int certs_npages = snp_dev->input.data_npages;
> > > > +
> > > > + exit_code = SVM_VMGEXIT_GUEST_REQUEST;
> > > > + rc = snp_issue_guest_request(exit_code, &snp_dev->input, &err);
> > > > +
> > > > + err = SNP_GUEST_REQ_INVALID_LEN;
> > >
> > > Huh, why are we overwriting err here?
> >
> > I have added a comment for the next revision.
> >
> > We are overwriting err here so that userspace is alerted that they
> > supplied a buffer too small.
>
> Sure but you're not checking rc either. What if that reissue fails for
> whatever other reason? -EIO for example...
If we get any error here we have to wipe the VMPCK here so I thought
this always override @err was OK.
I can update this to only override @err if after the secondary
SVM_VMGEXIT_GUEST_REQUEST rc and err are OK. Thoughts?
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
> GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Martje Boudien Moerman
> (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
