linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2-fix-v2 1/1] x86: Introduce generic protected guest abstractionn

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: <YLtaGXcjCMsSyT/a@zn.tnic>
Date:   Sat, 5 Jun 2021 13:03:53 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc:     Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2-fix-v2 1/1] x86: Introduce generic protected guest
 abstractionn

On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 06:31:03PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> If Intel has XYZ but AMD does not, you don't want to WARN, just return false.

Aha, *now*, I see what you mean. Ok, so the reason why I added the
WARN is to sanity-check whether we're handling all possible VM_* or
PROT_GUEST_* flags properly and whether we're missing some. As a
debugging help. It'll get removed before applying I guess.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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