Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] KVM: TDX: Check KVM exit on KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE when TD finalize

[Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>]

On 6/11/2025 3:58 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025, Rick P Edgecombe wrote:
>> On Tue, 2025-06-10 at 10:14 +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
>>> Check userspace has enabled KVM exit on KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE during
>>> KVM_TDX_FINALIZE_VM.
>>>
>>> TDVMCALL_MAP_GPA is one of the GHCI base TDVMCALLs, so it must be
>>> implemented by VMM to support TDX guests. KVM converts TDVMCALL_MAP_GPA
>>> to KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE, which requires userspace to enable
>>> KVM_CAP_EXIT_HYPERCALL with KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE bit set. Check it when
>>> userspace requests KVM_TDX_FINALIZE_VM, so that there is no need to check
>>> it during TDX guests running.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>
>> Do we need this change? It seems reasonable, but I don't think we need KVM to
>> ensure that userspace creates a TD that meets the GHCI spec.
> +1.  We do need to be careful about unintentionally creating ABI, but generally
> speaking KVM shouldn't police userspace.

OK.

>> So I'm not sure about the justification.
>>
>> It seems like the reasoning could be just to shrink the possible configurations
>> KVM has to think about, and that we only have the option to do this now before
>> the ABI becomes harder to change.
>>
>> Did you need any QEMU changes as a result of this patch?
>>
>> Wait, actually I think the patch is wrong, because KVM_CAP_EXIT_HYPERCALL could
>> be called again after KVM_TDX_FINALIZE_VM. In which case userspace could get an
>> exit unexpectedly. So should we drop this patch?
> Yes, drop it.
>
So, when the TDX guest calls MapGPA and KVM finds userspace doesn't opt-in
KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE, just return error to userspace?