linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 07/20] x86: Provide general kernel support for memory encryption

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2016 09:16:21 -0500
From:   Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <x86@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 07/20] x86: Provide general kernel support for
 memory encryption

On 09/05/2016 03:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:36:46PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>> Adding general kernel support for memory encryption includes:
>> - Modify and create some page table macros to include the Secure Memory
>>   Encryption (SME) memory encryption mask
>> - Update kernel boot support to call an SME routine that checks for and
>>   sets the SME capability (the SME routine will grow later and for now
>>   is just a stub routine)
>> - Update kernel boot support to call an SME routine that encrypts the
>>   kernel (the SME routine will grow later and for now is just a stub
>>   routine)
>> - Provide an SME initialization routine to update the protection map with
>>   the memory encryption mask so that it is used by default
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
>> ---
> 
> ...
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
>> index f1218f5..a01f0e1 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>  
>>  #include <linux/const.h>
>>  #include <asm/page_types.h>
>> +#include <asm/mem_encrypt.h>
>>  
>>  #define FIRST_USER_ADDRESS	0UL
>>  
>> @@ -121,9 +122,9 @@
>>  
>>  #define _PAGE_PROTNONE	(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE)
>>  
>> -#define _PAGE_TABLE	(_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_USER |	\
>> +#define __PAGE_TABLE	(_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_USER |	\
>>  			 _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_DIRTY)
> 
> Hmm, so this naming looks confusing and error-prone: the only difference
> is a single "_".
> 
> How about this instead:
> 
> #define _PAGE_TABLE_NO_ENC	(_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_USER |	\
> 	  			 _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_DIRTY)
> 
> #define _PAGE_TABLE (_PAGE_TABLE_NO_ENC | _PAGE_ENC)
> 
> Or call it _PAGE_TABLE_BASE or whatever.
> 
> Ditto for __KERNPG_TABLE.
> 
> This way you can differentiate between the two and use the _NO_ENC one
> to define _PAGE_TABLE. And it will be absolutely clear when you use the
> _NO_ENC one, what you mean and that you don't want to have the enc mask
> in the PTE.
> 
> Should be less confusing IMO too.

Yup, makes sense.  I'll rework/rename.

Thanks,
Tom

>