[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YhQUB2dIQJ/Ov3zp@zn.tnic>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 23:36:55 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>, aarcange@...hat.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
dave.hansen@...el.com, david@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
jgross@...e.com, jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org,
jpoimboe@...hat.com, knsathya@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, sdeep@...are.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, tony.luck@...el.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3.1 2.1/2] x86/coco: Add API to handle encryption mask
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 01:10:49AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> I'm not sure it is a good idea. It leaves room for code between these two
> calls. I believe they conceptually has to initialized in one shot. That's
> the only way we get consistent state.
Really, where?
My expectation would be that those things are set early enough during
boot, in your case in tdx_early_init(), for example, where stuff gets
initialized - not where it is used.
If you worry about having inconsistent state, then you're doing the init
not early enough.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists