linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 26/32] x86/mm: Move force_dma

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: <5cc06488-09fe-17b5-077b-02c4ba9ca198@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 May 2021 11:33:29 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 26/32] x86/mm: Move force_dma_unencrypted() to common
 code

On 5/17/21 11:27 AM, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> On 5/17/21 11:16 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> What generic code needs access to SEV vs. TDX? 
>> force_dma_unencrypted() is called from generic code, but its
>> implementation is x86 specific.
> 
> When the hardening the drivers for TDX usage, we will have
> requirement to check for is_protected_guest() to add code specific to
> protected guests. Since this will be outside arch/x86, we need common
> framework for it.

Just remember, a "common framework" doesn't mean that it can't be backed
by extremely arch-specific mechanisms.

For instance, there's a lot of pkey-specific code in mm/mprotect.c.  It
still gets optimized away on x86 with all the goodness of X86_FEATUREs.