linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2, RESEND] x86/efi: Safely enable unaccepted memory in UEFI

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <59f89cd9-9de8-cbec-7bce-cfef3284fd4c@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 08:33:05 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, "Min M. Xu" <min.m.xu@...el.com>,
        Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>,
        James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
        Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@...el.com>,
        Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2, RESEND] x86/efi: Safely enable unaccepted memory in
 UEFI

On 1/31/23 08:08, Dionna Amalie Glaze wrote:
>>> +       efi_status_t status;
>>> +
>>> +       if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY))
>> Do we need to check for IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT) here as well?
>>
> Arguably no, since the firmware should only make the protocol
> available when it determines that the protocol should be used. In our
> case, that's just SEV-SNP. The firmware's TDX logic will not expose
> this protocol.
> 
> This maintains flexibility for the rare case that the TDX go-to-market
> schedule doesn't align with upstream's acceptance of unaccepted memory
> support, but does accept the generic TDX support. Best not paint
> ourselves into a corner.

Yes, please.  Maintaining this functionality for TDX would provide some
more flexibility in how things get accepted upstream.