On 2/12/2025 3:25 PM, Easwar Hariharan wrote:
> On 2/12/2025 3:01 PM, Nuno Das Neves wrote:
>> On 2/11/2025 9:47 PM, Easwar Hariharan wrote:
>>> On 2/11/2025 2:21 PM, Nuno Das Neves wrote:
>>>> Introduce CONFIG_MSHV_ROOT as a tristate to enable root partition
>>>> booting and future mshv driver functionality.
>>>>
>>>> Change hv_root_partition into a function which always returns false
>>>> if CONFIG_MSHV_ROOT=n.
>>>>
>>>> Introduce hv_current_partition_type to store the type of partition
>>>> (guest, root, or other kinds in future), and hv_identify_partition_type()
>>>> to it up early in Hyper-V initialization.
>>>
>>> ...to *set* it up early?
>>>
>> Yep! Thanks for catching that
>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nuno Das Neves <nunodasne...@linux.microsoft.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Depends on
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hyperv/1738955002-20821-3-git-send-email-nunodasne...@linux.microsoft.com/
>>>>
>>>> arch/arm64/hyperv/mshyperv.c | 2 ++
>>>> arch/x86/hyperv/hv_init.c | 10 ++++----
>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c | 24 ++----------------
>>>> drivers/clocksource/hyperv_timer.c | 4 +--
>>>> drivers/hv/Kconfig | 12 +++++++++
>>>> drivers/hv/Makefile | 3 ++-
>>>> drivers/hv/hv.c | 10 ++++----
>>>> drivers/hv/hv_common.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>> drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c | 2 +-
>>>> drivers/iommu/hyperv-iommu.c | 4 +--
>>>> include/asm-generic/mshyperv.h | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>> 11 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +void hv_identify_partition_type(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * Check partition creation and cpu management privileges
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Hyper-V should never specify running as root and as a Confidential
>>>> + * VM. But to protect against a compromised/malicious Hyper-V trying
>>>> + * to exploit root behavior to expose Confidential VM memory, ignore
>>>> + * the root partition setting if also a Confidential VM.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if ((ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_CREATE_PARTITIONS) &&
>>>> + (ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_CPU_MANAGEMENT) &&
>>>> + !(ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_ISOLATION)) {
>>>> + hv_current_partition_type = HV_PARTITION_TYPE_ROOT;
>>>> + pr_info("Hyper-V: running as root partition\n");
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + hv_current_partition_type = HV_PARTITION_TYPE_GUEST;
>>>> + }
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> This should assume GUEST as default and modify to ROOT if all the checks
>>> pass.
>>>
>> It is doing that, isn't it?
>>
>> In fact the 'else' branch here is redundant and just there for additional
>> clarity.
>>
>> hv_current_partition_type is zeroed (so GUEST) by default, but I could make
>> that explicit
>> if you prefer:
>
> Yes, explicit is better, but see comment below.
>
>> +enum hv_partition_type hv_current_partition_type = HV_PARTITION_TYPE_GUEST;
>>
>> How does that sound? Am I misunderstanding something here?
>
> I'd suggest centralizing that in this function, instead of having it spread
> in 2 places.
> Since your commit message hints at future partition types, it's ideal to have
> this function be
> a central clearing house, which I suppose is the intent. The preferred
> pattern in general, and what I'm
> suggesting, is something like this:
>
> void hv_identify_partition_type(void)
> {
> /* Assume guest role */
> hv_current_partition_type = HV_PARTITION_TYPE_GUEST;
>
> /*
> * Check partition creation and cpu management privileges
> *
> * Hyper-V should never specify running as root and as a Confidential
> * VM. But to protect against a compromised/malicious Hyper-V trying
> * to exploit root behavior to expose Confidential VM memory, ignore
> * the root partition setting if also a Confidential VM.
> */
> if ((ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_CREATE_PARTITIONS) &&
> (ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_CPU_MANAGEMENT) &&
> !(ms_hyperv.priv_high & HV_ISOLATION)) {
> hv_current_partition_type = HV_PARTITION_TYPE_ROOT;
> pr_info("Hyper-V: running as root partition\n");
> }
> }
>
Fair enough, happy to do it this way.
>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> +static inline int hv_call_deposit_pages(int node, u64 partition_id, u32
>>>> num_pages)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return hv_result(U64_MAX);
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Is there value in perhaps #defining hv_result_<whatever this is> as U64_MAX
>>> and returning that for documentation?
>>> For e.g. assuming this is something like EOPNOTSUPP
>>>
>>> #define HV_RESULT_NOT_SUPP U64_MAX
>>>
>>> static inline int hv_call_deposit_pages(int node, u64 partition_id, u32
>>> num_pages)
>>> { return hv_result(HV_RESULT_NOT_SUPP); }
>>>
>> The idea here was to copy what hv_do_hypercall does returning U64_MAX in
>> case the hypercall
>> page is missing, which will hv_result() into an invalid status code. A
>> special value for
>> that status could make this pattern clearer.
>
> Agreed, having a name for that status would be helpful, but we don't want to
> diverge too much from the hypervisor
> definitions, especially if we're going to change it later again anyway.
>
>> I'd want to call out that this isn't a "real"
>> Hyper-V status code somehow. HV_STATUS's are 16 bits, so it would look more
>> like:
>>
>> /* "LINUX" because this isn't really a status from the hypervisor.. */
>> #define HV_STATUS_LINUX_FAIL 0xFFFF
>> static inline int hv_call_deposit_pages(int node, u64 partition_id, u32
>> num_pages)
>> { return HV_STATUS_LINUX_FAIL; }
>>
>> Another option: there is another patch coming (which you know of) which maps
>> hypercall
>> status codes to regular Linux errors like -EOPNOTSUPP. I could simply merge
>> that patch
>> with this one (or make this a series for v2), and that would result in less
>> churn.
>> (And leave alone the current use of U64_MAX in hv_do_hypercall, for now).
>>
>
> I think that second option is a good idea. The hypervisor status should
> remain restricted to the functions that are
> hv_do_hypercall() or call it directly, while the rest of the code uses
> standard errno values. I'd suggest making
> it a series so each commit does 1 thing.
>
Ok I'll do that, thanks.
Nuno
> Thanks,
> Easwar (he/him)
