[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32d5332d-b549-9ffd-b1d1-72dcd83bbb5f@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 07:13:56 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC 45/62] mm: Add the encrypt_mprotect() system call for
MKTME
On 6/17/19 5:15 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> But I really expect that the encryption of a DAX device will actually
>>> be a block device setting and won't look like this at all. It'll be
>>> more like dm-crypt except without device mapper.
>> Are you suggesting not to support MKTME for DAX, or adding MKTME support to dm-crypt?
> I'm proposing exposing it by an interface that looks somewhat like
> dm-crypt. Either we could have a way to create a device layered on
> top of the DAX devices that exposes a decrypted view or we add a way
> to tell the DAX device to kindly use MKTME with such-and-such key.
I think this basically implies that we need to settle (or at least
present) on an interface for storage (FS-DAX, Device DAX, page cache)
before we merge one for anonymous memory.
That sounds like a reasonable exercise.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists