Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] virt: tdx-guest: Allocate Quote buffer dynamically

Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.linux-coco,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 7/20/26 23:49, Peter Fang wrote:
...
>> This is all talking about post-quantum-crypto and all that fancy stuff.
>>
>> Isn't the important part here that the old TDX module ABI had static
>> quote sizes and now they're dynamic? Now, the reason it changed is all
>> the fancy stuff.
>>
>> But the ABI changed. Right?
> 
> Ah yes... I should call out that the size of
> /sys/kernel/config/tsm/report/$name/outblob will no longer be fixed.
> I'll update this. Thanks.

No. I mean the TDX Module ABI changed.

That's why we need new kernel patches.
>> The host may be untrusted, but it's also a critical part of the system.
>> Are we sure we want to be completely quiet?
>>
>> I used to see little dmesg warnings about TCP window shenanigans from
>> random systems on the Internet. Maybe that's not how we do things today,
>> but if a random dude on the Internet can spew one line to dmesg, is it
>> that crazy that a bad VMM be able to spew a warning?
> 
> That makes sense... I actually argued with AI about this but it kept
> saying this is kind of like DoSing the guest. But thinking about it
> more, tainting the guest is probably the right thing to do... At least
> the guest sees a big splat about why attestation is failing. I'll remove
> the __GFP_NOWARN. Thanks.

This does seem like the kind of high-level TDX policy that we all need
to be aligned on and probably document somewhere. The basic question is
whether a TDX guest should be quiet or verbose in the face of host
malfunction or malfeasance.

Kirill and Rick, what do you think?
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.