[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160510135758.GA16783@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 15:57:58 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, 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>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 10/18] x86/efi: Access EFI related tables in the
clear
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 02:43:58PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> Is it not possible to maintain some kind of kernel virtual address
> mapping so memremap*() and friends can figure out when to twiddle the
> mapping attributes and map with/without encryption?
I guess we can move the sme_* specific stuff one indirection layer
below, i.e., in the *memremap() routines so that callers don't have to
care... That should keep the churn down...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists