linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] swiotlb: Adjust SWIOTBL bounce buffer size for SEV guests.

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: <20201124090055.GB4009@zn.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 10:00:55 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc:     Ashish Kalra <Ashish.Kalra@....com>, hch@....de,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
        x86@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        dave.hansen@...ux-intel.com, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, brijesh.singh@....com,
        Thomas.Lendacky@....com, jon.grimm@....com, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] swiotlb: Adjust SWIOTBL bounce buffer size for SEV
 guests.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 01:43:27PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> I am assuming that TDX is going to have the same exact issue that 
> AMD SEV will have.
> 
> Are you recommending to have an unified x86 specific callback
> where we check if it:
> 
>  - CPUID_AMD_SEV or CPUID_INTEL_TDX is set, and
>  - No vIOMMU present, then we adjust the size?

I'm thinking do it correct right now and when TDX appears on the horizon
requesting this adjusted to TDX, then change it. Like we always do.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette