[<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
 
