[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210302194353.GH15469@zn.tnic>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 20:43:53 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>, 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>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
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>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] x86/boot/compressed/64: Check SEV encryption in
32-bit boot-path
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:21:34AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> + /*
> + * Store the sme_me_mask as an indicator that SEV is active. It will be
> + * set again in startup_64().
So why bother? Or does something needs it before that?
...
> +SYM_FUNC_START(sev_startup32_cbit_check)
s/sev_startup32_cbit_check/startup32_check_sev_cbit/
I guess.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists