linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v9 05/51] x86/coco: move CONFIG_HAS_CC

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]

Message-ID: <20230621085400.GDZJK6qMeOU2monJDv@fat_crate.local>
Date:   Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:54:00 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        jroedel@...e.de, thomas.lendacky@....com, hpa@...or.com,
        ardb@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
        vkuznets@...hat.com, jmattson@...gle.com, luto@...nel.org,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, slp@...hat.com, pgonda@...gle.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
        rientjes@...gle.com, dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com, tobin@....com,
        vbabka@...e.cz, kirill@...temov.name, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, marcorr@...gle.com,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, alpergun@...gle.com,
        dgilbert@...hat.com, jarkko@...nel.org, ashish.kalra@....com,
        nikunj.dadhania@....com, liam.merwick@...cle.com,
        zhi.a.wang@...el.com,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v9 05/51] x86/coco: move CONFIG_HAS_CC_PLATFORM check
 down into coco/Makefile

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 03:43:15PM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> Basically, arch/x86/coco/Makefile is never processed if arch/x86/Kbuild
> indicates that CONFIG_HAS_CC_PLATFORM is not set. So if we want to have
> stuff in arch/x86/coco/Makefile that build for !CONFIG_HAS_CC_PLATFORM,
> like SNP host support, which does not rely on CONFIG_HAS_CC_PLATFORM
> being set, that check needs to be moved down into arch/x86/coco/Makefile.

Ok, so if you put SNP host support into arch/x86/virt/svm/sev.c, that
should work too and won't have any relation to CONFIG_HAS_CC_PLATFORM,
right?

The CC_PLATFORM thing is a way to check for confidential computing guest
features by abstracting the capabilities so that you don't have to check
*each* and *every* conf guest type in the conditionals and thus go nuts.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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