Re: [RFC PATCH V2 06/18] x86/hyperv: Use vmmcall to implement hvcall in sev-snp enlightened guest

From: Tianyu Lan
Date: Wed Dec 14 2022 - 11:03:29 EST


On 12/14/2022 1:19 AM, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
From: Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 7:46 PM

In sev-snp enlightened guest, hvcall needs to use vmmcall to trigger

What does "hvcall" refer to here? Is this a Hyper-V hypercall, or just
a generic hypervisor call?

It's should be Hyper-V hypercall. Will make it accurate in the next
version. Thanks for reminder.


vmexit and notify hypervisor to handle hypercall request.

Signed-off-by: Tianyu Lan <tiala@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
index 9b8c3f638845..28d5429e33c9 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
@@ -45,16 +45,25 @@ static inline u64 hv_do_hypercall(u64 control, void *input, void *output)
u64 hv_status;

#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
- if (!hv_hypercall_pg)
- return U64_MAX;
+ if (hv_isolation_type_en_snp()) {
+ __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
+ "vmmcall"
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
+ : "r" (output_address)
+ : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ } else {
+ if (!hv_hypercall_pg)
+ return U64_MAX;

- __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
- CALL_NOSPEC
- : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
- "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
- : "r" (output_address),
- THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
- : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
+ CALL_NOSPEC
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
+ : "r" (output_address),
+ THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
+ : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ }
#else
u32 input_address_hi = upper_32_bits(input_address);
u32 input_address_lo = lower_32_bits(input_address);
@@ -82,12 +91,18 @@ static inline u64 hv_do_fast_hypercall8(u16 code, u64 input1)
u64 hv_status, control = (u64)code | HV_HYPERCALL_FAST_BIT;

#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
- {
+ if (hv_isolation_type_en_snp()) {
+ __asm__ __volatile__(
+ "vmmcall"
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
+ :: "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ } else {
__asm__ __volatile__(CALL_NOSPEC
- : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
- "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
- : THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
- : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
+ : THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
+ : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");

The above 4 lines appear to just have changes in indentation. Maybe
there's value in having the same indentation as the new code you've
added, so I won't object if you want to keep the changes.

OK. Will update in the next version.


}
#else
{
@@ -113,14 +128,21 @@ static inline u64 hv_do_fast_hypercall16(u16 code, u64 input1, u64 input2)
u64 hv_status, control = (u64)code | HV_HYPERCALL_FAST_BIT;

#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
- {
+ if (hv_isolation_type_en_snp()) {
__asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
- CALL_NOSPEC
- : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
- "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
- : "r" (input2),
- THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
- : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ "vmmcall"
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
+ : "r" (input2)
+ : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
+ } else {
+ __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
+ CALL_NOSPEC
+ : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
+ "+c" (control), "+d" (input1)
+ : "r" (input2),
+ THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
+ : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");