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]

Date:   Tue, 3 Oct 2017 13:20:24 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.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 Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 12:50:15PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Stupid question ahead: if it's just about guests, why bother with
> mem_encrypt=xxx at all?  kvm_amd should have a sev parameter anyway, you
> can just do kvm_amd.sev=0 to disable it.

Yes, it is only about guests so this could be a viable solution too.
I initially wanted to be able to disable all that SEV code but from a
quick glance over it, it is mostly behind an if (sev_active()) check so
I think the module arg should be good enough too.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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