[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57599668.20000@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:16:40 -0500
From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>,
Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.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>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 10/18] x86/efi: Access EFI related tables in the
clear
On 06/08/2016 05:07 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> (Sorry for the delay)
No worries, thanks for all the feedback.
>
> On Thu, 26 May, at 08:45:58AM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>
>> The patch in question is patch 6/18 where PAGE_KERNEL is changed to
>> include the _PAGE_ENC attribute (the encryption mask). This now
>> makes FIXMAP_PAGE_NORMAL contain the encryption mask while
>> FIXMAP_PAGE_IO does not. In this way, anything mapped using the
>> early_ioremap call won't be mapped encrypted.
>
> There are semantics attached to early_ioremap() that do not apply in
> this case; that you're mapping an MMIO region but for EFI we just care
> about noting where the firmware (not the kernel) populated the region
> with data. Similar problems exist for other early boot code such as
> the devicetree stuff.
>
> early_ioremap() is not the answer.
>
> What you really want is just some way to distinguish kernel-owned
> regions from those owned by "somebody else".
>
> I have no problem updating early_memremap() to take a @flags argument
> to make that distinction, provided that the naming is generic and not
> tied to AMD's SME technology via an "sme" prefix/suffix.
So maybe something along the lines of an enum that would have entries
(initially) like KERNEL_DATA (equal to zero) and EFI_DATA. Others could
be added later as needed.
Would you then want to allow the protection attributes to be updated
by architecture specific code through something like a __weak function?
In the x86 case I can add this function as a non-SME specific function
that would initially just have the SME-related mask modification in it.
Thanks,
Tom
>
> And making it generic should allow it to be easily sprinkled into the
> shared architecture code in drivers/firmware/efi/ without issue.
>
> I'm going to follow up with some additional comments/questions on
> PATCH 10.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists