[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <85de8576-05b7-400d-6020-7dba519c1d2e@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 16:18:48 +0100
From: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
lists@...dbynature.de, mikelley@...rosoft.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/mtrr: support setting MTRR state for software
defined MTRRs
On 13.02.23 16:11, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 04:03:07PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> Wouldn't !cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) be enough?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure we won't need that for TDX guests, too.
>>
>> See, that's the problem. I wanna have it simple too. Lemme check with
>> dhansen.
>
> He says MTRRs are enabled in TDX guests: "X86_FEATURE_MTRR is fixed to
> 1 in TDX guests."
>
> So we will have to do the more finer-grained check I guess.
Isn't the check for !X86_FEATURE_MTRR && X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR enough
then?
Yes, you still could construct cases where it would go wrong, but I don't
think we should over-engineer it.
Juergen
Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3099 bytes)
Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (496 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists