linux-kernel - Re: [RFC Patch 0/2] KVM: SVM: Cgroup support for SVM SEV ASIDs

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]

Message-ID: <20201103020623.GJ21563@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:06:24 -0800
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To:     Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>
Cc:     thomas.lendacky@....com, pbonzini@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org,
        lizefan@...wei.com, joro@...tes.org, corbet@....net,
        brijesh.singh@....com, jon.grimm@....com, eric.vantassell@....com,
        gingell@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 0/2] KVM: SVM: Cgroup support for SVM SEV ASIDs

On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 01:48:10PM -0700, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 03:22:20PM -0700, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> > I agree with you that the abstract name is better than the concrete
> > name, I also feel that we must provide HW extensions. Here is one
> > approach:
> > 
> > Cgroup name: cpu_encryption, encryption_slots, or memcrypt (open to
> > suggestions)
> > 
> > Control files: slots.{max, current, events}

I don't particularly like the "slots" name, mostly because it could be confused
with KVM's memslots.  Maybe encryption_ids.ids.{max, current, events}?  I don't
love those names either, but "encryption" and "IDs" are the two obvious
commonalities betwee TDX's encryption key IDs and SEV's encryption address
space IDs.