On Mon, Mar 03, 2025, Ashish Kalra wrote: > On 2/28/2025 4:32 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025, Ashish Kalra wrote: > >> And the other consideration is that runtime setup of especially SEV-ES VMs will not > >> work if/when first SEV-ES VM is launched, if SEV INIT has not been issued at > >> KVM setup time. > >> > >> This is because qemu has a check for SEV INIT to have been done (via SEV platform > >> status command) prior to launching SEV-ES VMs via KVM_SEV_INIT2 ioctl. > >> > >> So effectively, __sev_guest_init() does not get invoked in case of launching > >> SEV_ES VMs, if sev_platform_init() has not been done to issue SEV INIT in > >> sev_hardware_setup(). > >> > >> In other words the deferred initialization only works for SEV VMs and not SEV-ES VMs. > > > > In that case, I vote to kill off deferred initialization entirely, and commit to > > enabling all of SEV+ when KVM loads (which we should have done from day one). > > Assuming we can do that in a way that's compatible with the /dev/sev ioctls. > > Yes, that's what seems to be the right approach to enabling all SEV+ when KVM loads. > > For SEV firmware hotloading we will do implicit SEV Shutdown prior to DLFW_EX > and SEV (re)INIT after that to ensure that SEV is in UNINIT state before > DLFW_EX. > > We still probably want to keep the deferred initialization for SEV in > __sev_guest_init() by calling sev_platform_init() to support the SEV INIT_EX > case. Refresh me, how does INIT_EX fit into all of this? I.e. why does it need special casing?
