Re: [PATCH v1 6/9] KVM: x86: Add Heki hypervisor support

[Mickaël Salaün <mic@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 08/05/2023 23:18, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 05:20:43PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> > From: Madhavan T. Venkataraman <madvenka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Each supported hypervisor in x86 implements a struct x86_hyper_init to
> > define the init functions for the hypervisor.  Define a new init_heki()
> > entry point in struct x86_hyper_init.  Hypervisors that support Heki
> > must define this init_heki() function.  Call init_heki() of the chosen
> > hypervisor in init_hypervisor_platform().
> >
> > Create a heki_hypervisor structure that each hypervisor can fill
> > with its data and functions. This will allow the Heki feature to work
> > in a hypervisor agnostic way.
> >
> > Declare and initialize a "heki_hypervisor" structure for KVM so KVM can
> > support Heki.  Define the init_heki() function for KVM.  In init_heki(),
> > set the hypervisor field in the generic "heki" structure to the KVM
> > "heki_hypervisor".  After this point, generic Heki code can access the
> > KVM Heki data and functions.
> [...]
> > +static void kvm_init_heki(void)
> > +{
> > +       long err;
> > +
> > +       if (!kvm_para_available())
> > +               /* Cannot make KVM hypercalls. */
> > +               return;
> > +
> > +       err = kvm_hypercall3(KVM_HC_LOCK_MEM_PAGE_RANGES, -1, -1, -1);
> Why not do a proper version check or capability check here? If the ABI
> or supported features ever change then we have something to rely on?
The attributes will indeed get extended, but I wanted to have a simple 
proposal for now.
Do you mean to get the version of this hypercall e.g., with a dedicated 
flag, like with the 
landlock_create_ruleset/LANDLOCK_CREATE_RULESET_VERSION syscall?

> Thanks,
> Wei.