linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 03/11] x86/cpufeatures: Add TDX Guest CPU feature

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]

Date:   Wed, 6 Oct 2021 18:20:41 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Deep Shah <sdeep@...are.com>,
        VMware Inc <pv-drivers@...are.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Peter H Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 03/11] x86/cpufeatures: Add TDX Guest CPU feature

On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 08:43:48AM -0700, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> Yes. But, Joerg Roedel in his review recommended using variable
> similar to sme_me_mask to avoid function call in Intel platform in
> cc_platform_has().

That would normally make sense if this were a fast path. But I don't see
that being one. Besides, the subsequent runs will be the function call +
a couple of instructions:

# arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c:22: 	if (tdx_guest >= 0)
	movl	tdx_guest(%rip), %eax	# tdx_guest,
	testl	%eax, %eax	#
	jns	.L11	#,

...

.L11:
# arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c:23: 		return tdx_guest;
	setne	%al	#, <retval>
# arch/x86/kernel/tdx.c:35: }
	ret

which is not the end of the world.

And it if it is really used in a fast path, then we can do a static
branch etc.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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