linux-kernel - Re: [RFC Part1 PATCH 03/13] x86: add a helper routine for the PVALIDATE instruction

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: <20210326191241.GJ25229@zn.tnic>
Date:   Fri, 26 Mar 2021 20:12:41 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        ak@...ux.intel.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC Part1 PATCH 03/13] x86: add a helper routine for the
 PVALIDATE instruction

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 01:22:24PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Should I do the same for the sev-es.c ? Currently, I am keeping all the
> SEV-SNP specific changes in sev-snp.{c,h}. After a rename of
> sev-es.{c,h} from both the arch/x86/kernel and arch-x86/boot/compressed
> I can add the SNP specific stuff to it.
> 
> Thoughts ?

SNP depends on the whole functionality in SEV-ES, right? Which means,
SNP will need all the functionality of sev-es.c.

But sev-es.c is a lot more code than the header and snp is

 arch/x86/kernel/sev-snp.c               | 269 ++++++++++++++++++++++++

oh well, not so much.

I guess a single

arch/x86/kernel/sev.c

is probably ok.

We can always do arch/x86/kernel/sev/ later and split stuff then when it
starts getting real fat and impacts complication times.

Btw, there's also arch/x86/kernel/sev-es-shared.c and that can be

arch/x86/kernel/sev-shared.c

then.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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