[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <04defa6c-9cda-817c-c764-2911a5d45319@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 19:26:40 -0500
From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: brijesh.singh@....com,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: SME/32-bit regression
On 09/06/2017 04:03 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 09/06/2017 02:19 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 01:06:50PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>>> I did the following quick run with your patch and everything seems to be
>>> working okay
>>>
>>> 64-bit build:
>>> -------
>>> 1) Baremetal SME *enabled* - System boots fine
>>> a) 32-bit guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>> b) 64-bit guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>> c) 64-bit SEV guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>>
>>> 2) Baremetal SME *disabled* - System boots fine
>>> a) 32-bit guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>> b) 64-bit guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>> c) 64-bit SEV guest launch : successful (KVM HV)
>>>
>>> 32-bit build
>>> ----------
>>> I am installing 32-bit distro to verify 32-bit baremetal boot and will
>>> report my findings soon.
>> Thanks Brijesh, that's awesome!
>>
>> I'll add your Tested-by once you're done testing successfully.
>
32-bit seems to be working well - thanks
-Brijesh
>
> You can have my Tested-by (mostly Xen but some baremetal too).
>
> -boris
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists