linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/boot/compressed/64: Check SEV encryption in 64-bit boot-path

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:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:48:12 +0200
From:   Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@...il.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/boot/compressed/64: Check SEV encryption in
 64-bit boot-path

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 10:12:59AM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 02:18:54PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Why use r10-r12 rather than the caller-save registers? Even for the head
> code where you need to perserve the cr3 value you can just return it in
> rax?

It can surely be optimized, but it makes the code less robust.  This
function is only called from assembly so the standard x86-64 calling
conventions might not be followed strictly. I think its better to make
as few assumptions as possible about the calling code to avoid
regressions. Changes to the head code are not necessarily tested with
SEV/SEV-ES guests by developers.

Regards,

	Joerg