On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:10:34AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi Joerg,
I tried the patch set with 5.17.0-rc1 kernel, and I have a few questions:
1) Is it a bug or should qemu-kvm 6.2.0 be patched with specific patch? Because
I found it will exit with 0 when I tried to reboot the VM with sev-es enabled.
However with only sev enabled, the VM can do reboot with no problem:
[root@dell-per7525-03 ~]# virsh start TW-SEV-ES --console
....
Fedora Linux 35 (Server Edition)
Kernel 5.17.0-rc1 on an x86_64 (ttyS0)
....
[root@fedora ~]# reboot
.....
[ 48.077682] reboot: Restarting system
[ 48.078109] reboot: machine restart
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ guest vm reached restart
[root@dell-per7525-03 ~]# echo $?
0
^^^ qemu-kvm exit with 0, no reboot back to normal VM kernel
[root@dell-per7525-03 ~]#
2) With sev-es enabled and the 2 patch sets applied: A) [PATCH v3 00/10] x86/sev:
KEXEC/KDUMP support for SEV-ES guests, and B) [PATCH v6 0/7] KVM: SVM: Add initial
GHCB protocol version 2 support. I can enable kdump and have vmcore generated:
[root@fedora ~]# dmesg|grep -i sev
[ 0.030600] SEV: Hypervisor GHCB protocol version support: min=1 max=2
[ 0.030602] SEV: Using GHCB protocol version 2
[ 0.296144] AMD Memory Encryption Features active: SEV SEV-ES
[ 0.450991] SEV: AP jump table Blob successfully set up
[root@fedora ~]# kdumpctl status
kdump: Kdump is operational
However without the 2 patch sets, I can also enable kdump and have vmcore generated:
[root@fedora ~]# dmesg|grep -i sev
[ 0.295754] AMD Memory Encryption Features active: SEV SEV-ES
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ patch set A & B
not applied, so only have this string.
[root@fedora ~]# echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger
...
[ 2.759403] kdump[549]: saving vmcore-dmesg.txt to /sysroot/var/crash/127.0.0.1-2022-04-18-05:58:50/
[ 2.804355] kdump[555]: saving vmcore-dmesg.txt complete
[ 2.806915] kdump[557]: saving vmcore
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ vmcore can still be generated
...
[ 7.068981] reboot: Restarting system
[ 7.069340] reboot: machine restart
[root@dell-per7525-03 ~]# echo $?
0
^^^ same exit issue as question 1.
I doesn't have a complete technical background of the patch set, but isn't
it the issue which this patch set is trying to solve? Or I missed something?
Thanks,
Tao Liu
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization