Introduce tests for sev and sev-es ioctl that exercises the boot path of launch, update and finish on an invalid policy.
Signed-off-by: Pratik R. Sampat pratikrajesh.sampat@amd.com Tested-by: Peter Gonda pgonda@google.com Tested-by: Srikanth Aithal sraithal@amd.com --- .../selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c index 8e798f5a2a53..5fa4ee27609b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/sev_smoke_test.c @@ -142,12 +142,96 @@ static void test_sync_vmsa(uint32_t type, uint64_t policy) kvm_vm_free(vm); }
+static void sev_guest_neg_status_assert(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t type) +{ + struct kvm_sev_guest_status status; + int ret; + + ret = __vm_sev_ioctl(vm, KVM_SEV_GUEST_STATUS, &status); + TEST_ASSERT(ret, "KVM_SEV_GUEST_STATUS should fail, invalid VM Type."); +} + +static void vm_sev_es_launch_neg(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t type, uint64_t policy) +{ + int ret; + + /* Launch start with policy SEV_POLICY_NO_DBG (0x0) */ + ret = __sev_vm_launch_start(vm, 0); + TEST_ASSERT(ret, + "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_START should fail due to type (%d) - policy(0x0) mismatch", + type); + + ret = __sev_vm_launch_update(vm, policy); + TEST_ASSERT(ret, + "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_UPDATE should fail due to LAUNCH_START. type: %d policy: 0x%lx", + type, policy); + sev_guest_neg_status_assert(vm, type); + + ret = __sev_vm_launch_measure(vm, alloca(256)); + TEST_ASSERT(ret, + "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_UPDATE should fail due to LAUNCH_START. type: %d policy: 0x%lx", + type, policy); + sev_guest_neg_status_assert(vm, type); + + ret = __sev_vm_launch_finish(vm); + TEST_ASSERT(ret, + "KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_UPDATE should fail due to LAUNCH_START. type: %d policy: 0x%lx", + type, policy); + sev_guest_neg_status_assert(vm, type); +} + +/* + * Test for SEV ioctl launch path + * VMs of the type SEV and SEV-ES are created, however they are launched with + * an empty policy to observe the effect on the control flow of launching a VM. + * + * SEV - Expected to pass through the path of launch start, update, measure, + * and finish. vcpu_run expected to fail with error KVM_EXIT_IO. + * + * SEV-ES - Expected to fail the launch start as vm created with type + * KVM_X86_DEFAULT_VM but policy passed to launch start is KVM_X86_SEV_ES_VM. + * Post this, calls that pass the correct policy to update, measure, and finish + * are also expected to fail cascading. + */ +static void test_sev_launch(void *guest_code, uint32_t type, uint64_t policy) +{ + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; + int exp_exit_reason; + struct kvm_vm *vm; + struct ucall uc; + + vm = vm_sev_create_with_one_vcpu(type, guest_code, &vcpu); + + if (type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM) { + sev_vm_launch(vm, 0); + sev_vm_launch_measure(vm, alloca(256)); + sev_vm_launch_finish(vm); + } else { + vm_sev_es_launch_neg(vm, type, policy); + } + + vcpu_run(vcpu); + get_ucall(vcpu, &uc); + if (type == KVM_X86_SEV_VM) + exp_exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_IO; + else + exp_exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_FAIL_ENTRY; + + TEST_ASSERT(vcpu->run->exit_reason == exp_exit_reason, + "vcpu_run failed exit expected: %d, got: %d", + exp_exit_reason, vcpu->run->exit_reason); + + kvm_vm_free(vm); +} + static void test_sev(void *guest_code, uint32_t type, uint64_t policy) { struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; struct kvm_vm *vm; struct ucall uc;
+ test_sev_launch(guest_code, type, policy); + vm = vm_sev_create_with_one_vcpu(type, guest_code, &vcpu);
/* TODO: Validate the measurement is as expected. */