Re: [PATCH v9 3/6] x86/sev: Disable CPU hotplug while SNP is active

[K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>]

Hello Ashish,

On 6/25/2026 3:26 AM, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> From: Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@amd.com>
> 
> While SNP is active, every memory write is checked against the RMP to
> protect the integrity of SEV-SNP guest memory.  By the SNP architecture
> these checks cannot be disabled on a subset of CPUs: they are gated
> per-core by SYSCFG[SNP_EN], which the SEV firmware requires to be set on
> every present CPU before SNP initialization.  A CPU that does not have
> SNP_EN set and was not initialized via SNP_INIT performs no RMP checks at
> all, so there is no valid configuration with SNP active and any CPU exempt
> from RMP checks.
> 
> The firmware determines which CPUs are present from the processor and the
> BIOS/UEFI configuration (e.g. SMT disabled in the BIOS) and enumerates
> them at SNP init; it is not aware of the OS bringing CPUs online or
> offline afterwards.  A CPU brought online after SNP init was not
> enumerated at SNP_INIT and does not have SNP_EN set, so writes from it are
> not RMP-checked and could corrupt SEV-SNP guest memory, and there is no
> way to keep work off such a CPU once it is online.  OS CPU hotplug can thus
> diverge from the firmware's expectations and break SNP.

If this is true ...

[..snip..]

> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/ccp/sev-dev.c b/drivers/crypto/ccp/sev-dev.c
> index 217b6b19802e..66475145b3fa 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/ccp/sev-dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/ccp/sev-dev.c
> @@ -1479,6 +1479,9 @@ static int __sev_snp_init_locked(int *error, unsigned int max_snp_asid)
>  
>  	snp_hv_fixed_pages_state_update(sev, HV_FIXED);
>  
> +	/* Disable CPU hotplug while SNP is active (see snp_disable_cpu_hotplug). */
> +	snp_disable_cpu_hotplug();

... then this should be done at snp_prepare() before
on_each_cpu(snp_enable) right?

If not, then any CPU hotplug between the cpus_read_unlock() there and
the snp_disable_cpu_hotplug() here will not have the SNP_EN set.

Isn't that a concern?

Also, this patch can probably go first since the FW assumptions on
hotplug exists independent of RMPOPT bits.

> +
>  	snp_setup_rmpopt();
>  
>  	sev->snp_initialized = true;

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek