[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170728062807.k7bzg3qgxsxlllly@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:28:07 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] acpi, x86: Remove encryption mask from ACPI page
protection type
* Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com> wrote:
> > > + * in memory in an encrypted state so return a protection attribute
> > > + * that does not have the encryption bit set.
> > > */
> > > - return PAGE_KERNEL;
> > > + return sme_active() ? PAGE_KERNEL_IO : PAGE_KERNEL;
> >
> > Why isn't there a PAGE_KERNEL_NOENC define which you can simply return
> > instead of testing?
>
> Sounds like something I should add to pgtable_types.h (which has a
> #define for PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC_NOENC, but not PAGE_KERNEL_NOENC). I'll
> create that #define.
>
> As for the sme_active() check I was getting ahead of myself since
> under SEV the encryption mask is needed. I'll change it to just
> return PAGE_KERNEL_NOENC and then worry about the SEV change in
> the SEV patches.
Ok, that works for me too, as we at least don't sprinke the code with repeated
sme_active() toggles.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists