linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 05/16] x86/virt/tdx: Implement functions to make SEAMCALL

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:   Fri, 6 Jan 2023 09:29:33 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
        ying.huang@...el.com, reinette.chatre@...el.com,
        len.brown@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        isaku.yamahata@...el.com, chao.gao@...el.com,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, bagasdotme@...il.com,
        sagis@...gle.com, imammedo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 05/16] x86/virt/tdx: Implement functions to make
 SEAMCALL

The subject here is a bit too specific.  This patch isn't just
"implementing functions".  There are more than just functions here.  The
best subject is probably:

	Add SEAMCALL infrastructure

But that's rather generic by necessity because this patch does several
_different_ logical things:

 * Wrap TDX_MODULE_CALL so it can be used for SEAMCALLs with host=1
 * Add handling to TDX_MODULE_CALL to allow it to handle specifically
   host-side error conditions
 * Add high-level seamcall() function with actual error handling

It's probably also worth noting that the code that allows "host=1" to be
passed to TDX_MODULE_CALL is dead code in mainline right now.  It
probably shouldn't have been merged this way, but oh well.

I don't know that you really _need_ to split this up, but I'm just
pointing out that mashing three different logical things together makes
it hard to write a coherent Subject.  But, I've seen worse.