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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:30:44 -0500 From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com> To: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> 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>, "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>, Dov Murik <dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com>, Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@....com>, Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, tony.luck@...el.com, brijesh.ksingh@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH Part1 RFC v4 05/36] x86/sev: Define the Linux specific guest termination reasons On 8/10/21 9:59 AM, Brijesh Singh wrote: > On 8/10/21 6:33 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 01:14:35PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: >>> +#define SEV_TERM_SET_LINUX 1 >> >> GHCB doc says: >> >> "This document defines and owns reason code set 0x0" >> >> Should it also say, reason code set 1 is allocated for Linux guest use? >> I don't see why not... >> > Tom? >> > > If Tom is okay with it then maybe in next version of the GHCB doc can add > this text. IIRC, during the review of the first GHCB version there was discussion about assigning reason sets outside of 0 within the spec and the overall feeling was to not do that as part of the spec. We can re-open that discussion for the next version of the GHCB document. Thanks, Tom
Powered by blists - more mailing lists