[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200720152955.GA620@8bytes.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 17:29:55 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Cfir Cohen <cfir@...gle.com>,
Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Mike Stunes <mstunes@...are.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 70/75] x86/head/64: Don't call verify_cpu() on
starting APs
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 12:49:23PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Aaah. I see. Thanks for the details there. So ... can you add a bunch
> more comments about why/when the new entry path is being used? I really
> don't want to accidentally discover some unrelated refactoring down
> the road (in months, years, unrelated to SEV, etc) starts to also skip
> verify_cpu() on Intel systems. There had been a lot of BIOSes that set
> this MSR to disable NX, and I don't want to repeat that pain: Linux must
> never start an Intel CPU with that MSR set. :P
Understood :)
I added a comment above the label explaining why it is only used for
SEV-ES guests and pointing out the importance of running verify_cpu() on
all other systems, especially if they are Intel based.
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists