Re: [PATCH v4 28/31] hw/i386: Add support for loading BIOS using guest_memfd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 6/14/2024 4:48 PM, Gupta, Pankaj wrote:
On 6/14/2024 10:34 AM, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
On 5/30/2024 7:16 PM, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
From: Michael Roth <michael.roth@xxxxxxx>

When guest_memfd is enabled, the BIOS is generally part of the initial
encrypted guest image and will be accessed as private guest memory. Add
the necessary changes to set up the associated RAM region with a
guest_memfd backend to allow for this.

Current support centers around using -bios to load the BIOS data.
Support for loading the BIOS via pflash requires additional enablement
since those interfaces rely on the use of ROM memory regions which make
use of the KVM_MEM_READONLY memslot flag, which is not supported for
guest_memfd-backed memslots.

Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <michael.roth@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@xxxxxxx>
---
  hw/i386/x86-common.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/i386/x86-common.c b/hw/i386/x86-common.c
index f41cb0a6a8..059de65f36 100644
--- a/hw/i386/x86-common.c
+++ b/hw/i386/x86-common.c
@@ -999,10 +999,18 @@ void x86_bios_rom_init(X86MachineState *x86ms, const char *default_firmware,
      }
      if (bios_size <= 0 ||
          (bios_size % 65536) != 0) {
-        goto bios_error;
+        if (!machine_require_guest_memfd(MACHINE(x86ms))) {
+                g_warning("%s: Unaligned BIOS size %d", __func__, bios_size);
+                goto bios_error;
+        }
+    }
+    if (machine_require_guest_memfd(MACHINE(x86ms))) {
+        memory_region_init_ram_guest_memfd(&x86ms->bios, NULL, "pc.bios",
+                                           bios_size, &error_fatal);
+    } else {
+        memory_region_init_ram(&x86ms->bios, NULL, "pc.bios",
+                               bios_size, &error_fatal);
      }
-    memory_region_init_ram(&x86ms->bios, NULL, "pc.bios", bios_size,
-                           &error_fatal);
      if (sev_enabled()) {
          /*
           * The concept of a "reset" simply doesn't exist for
@@ -1023,9 +1031,11 @@ void x86_bios_rom_init(X86MachineState *x86ms, const char *default_firmware,
      }
      g_free(filename);
-    /* map the last 128KB of the BIOS in ISA space */
-    x86_isa_bios_init(&x86ms->isa_bios, rom_memory, &x86ms->bios,
-                      !isapc_ram_fw);
+    if (!machine_require_guest_memfd(MACHINE(x86ms))) {
+        /* map the last 128KB of the BIOS in ISA space */
+        x86_isa_bios_init(&x86ms->isa_bios, rom_memory, &x86ms->bios,
+                          !isapc_ram_fw);
+    }

Could anyone explain to me why above change is related to this patch and why need it?

because inside x86_isa_bios_init(), the alias isa_bios is set to read_only while guest_memfd doesn't support readonly?

I could not understand your comment entirely. This condition is for non guest_memfd case? You expect something else?

I'm asking why x86_isa_bios_init() cannot be called when machine requires guest memfd.

Please see my comment[1] to previous patch, patch 27, the two patches conflict with each other. The two patches did lack the clarification on the changes it made. sigh...

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/ce895ad3-7a84-4af1-8927-6e85f60ef4f6@xxxxxxxxx/

Thanks,
Pankaj

      /* map all the bios at the top of memory */
      memory_region_add_subregion(rom_memory,







[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux