linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH Part1 RFC v3 06/22] x86/sev: check SEV-SNP features support

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: <YMwzPjV9s/6qW75m@zn.tnic>
Date:   Fri, 18 Jun 2021 07:46:38 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sergio Lopez <slp@...hat.com>, Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, tony.luck@...el.com,
        npmccallum@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Part1 RFC v3 06/22] x86/sev: check SEV-SNP features
 support

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 01:46:08PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Based on your feedback on AP creation patch to not use the accessors, I am inclined to
> remove this helper and have the caller directly check the feature bit, is that okay ?
> 
> something like:
> 
> if (sev_snp_enabled() && !(hv_features & GHCB_HV_FT_SNP))
> 	sev_es_terminate(GHCB_SNP_UNSUPPORTED);
> 
> Let me know if you think I should still keep the accessors.

Yeah, looks about right. Let's keep hv_features in a sev-specific
header so that there are no name clashes. Or maybe we should call it
sev_hv_features since it is going to be read-only anyway.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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