[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YNujUGuIpMc8VJPS@zn.tnic>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:48:48 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Dov Murik <dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@...hat.com>,
Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jim Cadden <jcadden@....com>, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] virt: Add sev_secret module to expose
confidential computing secrets
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 10:23:49AM +0300, Dov Murik wrote:
> But not if it's a generic driver that is useful for other confidential
> computing implementations. Consider some non-encrypting guest memory
> isolation mechanism where the host can't read most guest pages; this
> module might be useful there too.
Anything concrete or just hypothetical?
In any case, if this thing is generic, it should not have "AMD" and
"SEV" in the strings.
> Also, isn't it a bit weird to depend on CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT but not
> use any of its APIs?
Yeah, see above.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists