Re: [PATCH v3 10/12] KVM: SEV: Forcefully invalidate SNP VMSA if its backing gmem page is zapped
From: Sean Christopherson
Date: Tue Jul 07 2026 - 12:04:43 EST
On Wed, Jul 01, 2026, Michael Roth wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 03:26:05PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h | 2 +
> > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 4 ++
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 5 ++
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 2 +
> > arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h | 2 +
> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 +++
> > include/linux/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> > virt/kvm/guest_memfd.c | 4 ++
> > 9 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> ...
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
> > index cf7c1a437f38..123e7bf687ef 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
> > @@ -996,6 +996,7 @@ static inline struct page *snp_safe_alloc_page(void)
> > {
> > return snp_safe_alloc_page_node(numa_node_id(), GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
> > }
> > +void sev_snp_reload_vmsa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >
> > int sev_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> > void sev_free_vcpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> > @@ -1009,6 +1010,7 @@ int sev_dev_get_attr(u32 group, u64 attr, u64 *val);
> > extern unsigned int max_sev_asid;
> > void sev_handle_rmp_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t gpa, u64 error_code);
> > int sev_gmem_prepare(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn, gfn_t gfn, int max_order);
> > +void sev_gmem_invalidate_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range);
> > void sev_gmem_reclaim_memory(kvm_pfn_t start, kvm_pfn_t end);
> > int sev_gmem_max_mapping_level(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn, bool is_private);
> > struct vmcb_save_area *sev_decrypt_vmsa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index bc0c3163f4a3..0bb50997c0e3 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -8170,6 +8170,8 @@ static int vcpu_enter_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > goto out;
> > }
> > }
> > + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_VMSA_PAGE_RELOAD, vcpu))
> > + kvm_x86_call(reload_vmsa)(vcpu);
>
> VMSA is SVM/SEV-specific, and while the event/handling might be SEV-specific,
It's not just SEV specific, it's SEV-ES+ specific. Splitting hairs, but IMO
the distinction matters because while there is a "save area" for SVM and SEV
vCPUs, they don't have a dedicated, separata VMSA.
> would it make sense to make the kvm_x86_op generic at least?
>
> 'reload_guest_save_area' maybe?
I think I'd prefer to keep the extra-ugly vmsa terminology? We've already bled
gory details into common x86, and I don't see an easy way around that. IMO, at
that point, any abstraction does more harm than good.
E.g. reload_guest_save_area() is more like to be misread as "reload the save state
from KVM's vCPU state". Hmm, though by that argument, reload_vmsa_page() would
be even better.