Re: [PATCH 0/7] qemu: tpm: Add support for migration across shared storage

On 8/22/22 12:35, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:05:47AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > > This series of patches adds support for migrating vTPMs across hosts whose > > storage has been set up to share the directory structure holding the state > > of the TPM (swtpm). The domain XML is extended with a shared_storage > > attribute that must be set to 'yes' when shared storage is used. It > > We don't require any 'shared_storage' attribute for disk images - we just > aim to "do the right thing" automatically. If we want to support shared > storage for TPM, then IMHO it should likewise be made transparent. > > What's the thinking behind putting the TPM on shared storage though ? It's drive by swtpm user(s): https://github.com/stefanberger/swtpm/pull/732 The driving force is having the state available on the destination to restart a VM there if the original host failed. Allegedly all hosts in their setup would share the necessary storage to be able to do that with TPM state but then presumably also with the disk image(s).

> The state is tiny so you're not going to notice it being transferred Tiny is relative to disk sizes. It can become ~260kb or so, depending on how much is stored in the NVRAM areas, but yes, it's comparably small.

> in the regular migration stream, so there's no performance benefit > here. Meanwhile it hurts security because we can't do SELinux isolation > on many NFS install, and the complexity of the dance around locking makes > the migration process more fragile. The pain we've had dealing with NFS > makes it really unappealing Others would want to use CephFS for it I heard and I am not sure what the pain points with this shared storage tech are. > > > influences the management of the directory structure holding the TPM state, > > which for example is only to be removed when a domain is undefined (virsh > > undefine) and not when a VM is removed on the migration source host. > > Further, when shared storage is used security labeling on the destination > > side is skipped assuming that the labeling was already done on the source > > side. > > > > I have tested this with an NFS setup where I had to turn SELinux off on > > the hosts since the SELinux MLS range labeling is not supported. > > Have you tested in systems where 'root_squash' is enabled on the NFS > server, such that libvirt can't create the files as 'root' and then > chown them to 'qemu' later ? That's been a major source of pain related > to NFS for disks and snapshots historically. Yes, that doesn't seem to work. I had used it with no_root_squash before. # virsh start testVM error: Failed to start domain 'testVM' error: internal error: Could not create directory /var/lib/libvirt/swtpm/ecc221c4-6bb9-423f-ac31-72244fdbb1a1/tpm2 as 59:59 Stefan