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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:01:05 -0500
From:   Brijesh Singh <>
To:     Borislav Petkov <>
Cc:,,, Paolo Bonzini <>,
        Radim Krčmář <>,
        Herbert Xu <>,
        Gary Hook <>,
        Tom Lendacky <>,
Subject: Re: [Part2 PATCH v7 18/38] crypto: ccp: Implement SEV_PEK_CSR ioctl

On 11/3/17 2:42 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:

>> +	if (psp_master->sev_state == SEV_STATE_UNINIT) {
>> +		ret = __sev_platform_init_locked(psp_master->sev_init, &argp->error);
> Right, you're passing psp_master->sev_init (or whatever you're going to
> end up calling it) down but then in __sev_platform_init_locked() you end
> up doing
>         if (!data)
>                 data = &psp->cmd_buf;
> which looks silly.
> IOW, if not really required, __sev_platform_init_locked() could have
> only one argument instead:
> static int __sev_platform_init_locked(int *error)

The cmd_buf argument can be remove. I am have not looked at SEV-ES but
it may be possible that during SEV-ES patches kvm driver may need to
call the sev_platform_init() with different cmd_buf to initialize SEV-ES
states. I can removed it in next version.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists