linux-kernel - Re: Reserved bits and commit x86/sev-es: Set x86_virt_bits to the correct value straight away, instead of a two-phase approach

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: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 21:44:19 +0000
From: Jacob Xu <jacobhxu@...gle.com>
To: jacobhxu@...gle.com
Cc: Thomas.Lendacky@....com, acdunlap@...gle.com, ashish.kalra@....com, 
	bp@...en8.de, felix-coreboot@...ixheld.de, jeremy.compostella@...el.com, 
	kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	michael.roth@....com, mingo@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: Reserved bits and commit x86/sev-es: Set x86_virt_bits to the
 correct value straight away, instead of a two-phase approach

Oops, I left out one of my questions (besides for the chime-in on fix).

What's the consequence of having this field un-adjusted? We noticed it's zero for milan but non-zero on Genoa.

Jacob