[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9635ebf0-7c99-6edf-1240-8dec28036a70@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:26:55 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: SEV guest regression in 4.18
On 22/08/2018 22:11, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>
> Yes, this is one of approach I have in mind. It will avoid splitting
> the larger pages; I am thinking that early in boot code we can lookup
> for this special section and decrypt it in-place and probably maps with
> C=0. Only downside, it will increase data section footprint a bit
> because we need to align this section to PM_SIZE.
If you can ensure it doesn't span a PMD, maybe it does not need to be
aligned; you could establish a C=0 mapping of the whole 2M around it.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists