linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/CPU/AMD, mm: Extend with mem

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]

Message-ID: <20171002135151.6y7awrqoc6foa6wf@pd.tnic>
Date:   Mon, 2 Oct 2017 15:51:51 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/CPU/AMD, mm: Extend with mem_encrypt=sme option

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 08:44:21AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> I think we're talking about the same thing.  You want sev_enabled to
> indicate whether you can launch an SEV guest.  We would still need an
> sev_active variable to distinguish between SME and SEV during kernel
> execution when the sme_me_mask is non-zero.  Currently, the SEV feature
> bit acts as "sev_enabled" and the sev_enabled variable acts as
> "sev_active" in this scenario.

See my last email about sev_host_enabled. Does that sound better?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--