Re: [libvirt PATCH v3 12/13] qemu: probe for sev-guest.kernel-hashes property

On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 16:47:12 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > This sev-guest object property indicates whether QEMU should > expose the kernel, ramdisk, cmdline hashes to the firmware > for measurement. > > The 6.2.0 capabilities are hacked to look as if they were > generated with sev-guest support. > > Reviewed-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa(a)redhat.com&gt; > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com&gt; > --- > src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c | 8 ++ > src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.h | 1 + > .../domaincapsdata/qemu_6.2.0-q35.x86_64.xml | 7 +- > .../domaincapsdata/qemu_6.2.0-tcg.x86_64.xml | 7 +- > tests/domaincapsdata/qemu_6.2.0.x86_64.xml | 7 +- > .../caps_2.12.0.x86_64.replies | 97 ++++++++++++---- > .../caps_3.0.0.x86_64.replies | 97 ++++++++++++---- > .../caps_3.1.0.x86_64.replies | 97 ++++++++++++---- > .../caps_4.0.0.x86_64.replies | 97 ++++++++++++---- > .../caps_4.1.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_4.2.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_5.0.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_5.1.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_5.2.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_6.0.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_6.1.0.x86_64.replies | 89 ++++++++++---- > .../caps_6.2.0.x86_64.replies | 109 ++++++++++++++---- > .../caps_6.2.0.x86_64.xml | 8 ++ > 18 files changed, 895 insertions(+), 263 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c > index ddd61ecfc9..9553e6e5b8 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c > @@ -652,6 +652,7 @@ VIR_ENUM_IMPL(virQEMUCaps, > "device.json", /* QEMU_CAPS_DEVICE_JSON */ > "query-dirty-rate", /* QEMU_CAPS_QUERY_DIRTY_RATE */ > "rbd-encryption", /* QEMU_CAPS_RBD_ENCRYPTION */ > + "sev-guest-kernel-hashes", /* QEMU_CAPS_SEV_GUEST_KERNEL_HASHES */ > ); > > > @@ -1718,6 +1719,10 @@ static struct virQEMUCapsStringFlags virQEMUCapsObjectPropsMaxCPU[] = { > { "migratable", QEMU_CAPS_CPU_MIGRATABLE }, > }; > > +static struct virQEMUCapsStringFlags virQEMUCapsObjectPropsSEVGuest[] = { > + { "kernel-hashes", QEMU_CAPS_SEV_GUEST_KERNEL_HASHES }, > +}; > + > static virQEMUCapsObjectTypeProps virQEMUCapsObjectProps[] = { > { "memory-backend-file", virQEMUCapsObjectPropsMemoryBackendFile, > G_N_ELEMENTS(virQEMUCapsObjectPropsMemoryBackendFile), > @@ -1731,6 +1736,9 @@ static virQEMUCapsObjectTypeProps virQEMUCapsObjectProps[] = { > { "max-arm-cpu", virQEMUCapsObjectPropsMaxCPU, > G_N_ELEMENTS(virQEMUCapsObjectPropsMaxCPU), > QEMU_CAPS_ARM_MAX_CPU }, > + { "sev-guest", virQEMUCapsObjectPropsSEVGuest, > + G_N_ELEMENTS(virQEMUCapsObjectPropsSEVGuest), > + QEMU_CAPS_SEV_GUEST }, Actually, when reviewing the last patch I've noticed that 'sev-guest' which you are querying is actually an '-object', so you don't need any of this complicated query machinery which modifies all .replies files but rather it's enough to use the QMP schema query: Once you add to virQEMUCapsQMPSchemaQueries[] the following line: { "object-add/arg-type/+sev-guest/kernel-hashes", QEMU_CAPS_SEV_GUEST_KERNEL_HASHES }, The result is the same information. I actually see you also hacked the schema to add the field because I presume the QAPI schema validation failed if that was not the case.