linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest

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: <934f3e72-49d1-be56-6fa2-f37a02413fb2@amd.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Aug 2021 16:59:00 -0500
From:   Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-graphics-maintainer@...are.com,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active()
 with prot_guest_has()

On 8/2/21 5:45 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:26:09PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>> @@ -48,7 +47,7 @@ static void sme_sev_setup_real_mode(struct trampoline_header *th)
>>  	if (prot_guest_has(PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT))
>>  		th->flags |= TH_FLAGS_SME_ACTIVE;
>>  
>> -	if (sev_es_active()) {
>> +	if (prot_guest_has(PATTR_GUEST_PROT_STATE)) {
>>  		/*
>>  		 * Skip the call to verify_cpu() in secondary_startup_64 as it
>>  		 * will cause #VC exceptions when the AP can't handle them yet.
> 
> Not sure how TDX will handle AP booting, are you sure it needs this
> special setup as well? Otherwise a check for SEV-ES would be better
> instead of the generic PATTR_GUEST_PROT_STATE.

Yes, I'm not sure either. I figure that change can be made, if needed, as
part of the TDX support.

Thanks,
Tom

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Joerg
>