Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] tdx-guest: Make Quote buffer size dynamic
Sean Christopherson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.linux-coco,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Aug 11, 2026, Rick P Edgecombe wrote: > Sean, Dave, Kiryl, > > In PUCK we talked about how the TD scoped quote operation avoids changes > in the guest. But this series is actually changing the guest, so is > somewhat at odds to that assertion. It turns out there are some tradeoffs > here that also connect to TDX migration uAPI. Please see below for an > explanation and recommended course of action. > > As a gentle recall helper... The general attestation flow converts a > report to a quote, which then gets checked by a verifier. The report is > like a snapshot of the guest and its environment. The quote is a signed > version of the report plus hardware certs. It's signed with a hardware key > and can use different kinds of crypto. > > These pieces are evolving to handle a few problems at once: > - The stuff that needs to be attested is growing. Basically more platform > details and devices are getting added to the blobs. > - The crypto stuff is growing. The post quantum crypto stuff is large, > etc. That stuff lives in the quote. > - Migration wants a quote that is platform specific and not TD specific. > > Because the platform details are growing, they need to either go into a > larger report or added later via a TD scoped quote. But the post quantum > crypto stuff is going to bloat the quote either way. > > If the report grows to include all the TD specific details, then the QUOTE > seamcall can be platform scoped because all the details that it needs are > passed in as args. > > But if it is TD scoped, the report can stay the same size and the extra > details can just be added during the quote operation. For migration, it > only needs a platform scoped quote. If there are extra details about a > specific TD, the migration stuff can be fine to just ignore them. (i.e. it > can get what it needs from TD scoped quotes or platform scoped quotes). > > The current QUOTE seamcall supports both: platform scoped and TD scoped > operations. But since we could get by with either only a platform or TD > scoped seamcall for both operations, we could reduce the kernel's uAPIs, > or change the API's location. Per recent discussion, Sean sees TD scoped > APIs living in KVM and platform scoped things living in the host > driver/tip. So all that leaves us with something like this: > > |Normal quote |Migration quote |Report size|Quote size|uAPI location | > -|----------------|----------------|-----------|----------|---------------| > 1|Platform scoped |Platform scoped |Grows |Grows |TDX host driver| With my KVM hat on, this option looks very attractive. And with the caveat that I'm most definitely not an attestation expert, from a separate of concerns perspective, IMO it seems like the report should contain the TD-specific information while the quote just wraps that information in platform- specific goo. In other words, to me, TD-scoped quotes feel like a hack that was thrown in to avoid having to modify the guest because y'all didn't plan ahead. > 2|TD scoped |TD scoped |Fixed |Grows |KVM | > 3|TD scoped |Platform scoped |Fixed |Grows |Both | > > > I'm thinking we should proceed with 2 because only the quote size changes. > So less guest changes over time. 3 is not really a disaster either, but we > shouldn't need 2 uABIs. For 1, from early discussion it seems it can be > made to work but sounds like it will require some more extensive changes > to the TDX attestation stuff. So probably needs a bit more investigation > before we can say it won't disturb some other VMM vendor, etc.