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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20231205171643.zg7fwxjyccab53kf@box.shutemov.name> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 20:16:43 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/coco, x86/sev: Use cpu_feature_enabled() to detect SEV guest flavor On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 06:14:37PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > My point is that if you need to check for SEV you need to check SEV, not > > CC_ATTR. CC_ATTRs only make sense in generic code that deals with multiple > > CoCo environments. > > That makes more sense. > > So that commit already says "If future support is added for other > memory encryption technologies, the use of CC_ATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT > can be updated, as required." > > And what this test needs to do is to check: > > if (guest type >= SEV) > > meaning SEV and -ES and -SNP. > > I'm wondering if we should export amd_cc_platform_has() for such > cases... What's wrong with using X86_FEATURE_* here? X86_FEATURE_SEV_GUEST is set for all SEVs. X86_FEATURE_SEV_ES_GUEST and X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP_GUEST can be used to test specific flavor. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists