linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data when SEV is active

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:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 13:43:59 -0500
From:   Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc:     brijesh.singh@....com, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data
 when SEV is active



On 09/06/2018 01:33 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 08:54:52AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> My thought was that we could simply define a second array for the SEV
>> case to statically allocate for NR_CPUS since __decrypted has a big
>> chunk of memory that would be ununsed anyways[1]. And since the second
>> array is only used for SEV it can be freed if !SEV.
> 
> Lemme see if I get it straight:
> 
> __decrypted:
> 
>   4K
> 
> __decrypted_XXX:
> 
>   ((num_possible_cpus() * 32) / 4K) pages
> 
> __decrypted_end:
> 
> Am I close?


Yes.