[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ac4f34a0-036a-48b9-ab56-8257700842fc@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:24:29 +0100
From: Jeremi Piotrowski <jpiotrowski@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86/CPU/AMD: Track SNP host status with
cc_platform_*()
On 28/03/2024 14:41, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 12:51:17PM +0100, Jeremi Piotrowski wrote:
>> Shouldn't this line be inside the cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP) check?
>
> The cc_vendor is not dependent on X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP.
>
It's not but if you set it before the check it will be set for all AMD systems,
even if they are neither CC hosts nor CC guests.
cc_vendor being unset is handled correctly in cc_platform_has() checks.
>> How about turning this into a more specific check:
>>
>> if (!cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_SEV_SNP) &&
>
> Why?
>
To leave open the possibility of an SNP hypervisor running nested.
> The check is "am I running as a hypervisor on baremetal".
>
I thought you wanted to filter out SEV-SNP guests, which also have X86_FEATURE_SEV_SNP
CPUID bit set.
My understanding is that these are the cases:
CPUID(SEV_SNP) | MSR(SEV_SNP) | what am I
---------------------------------------------
set | set | SNP-guest
set | unset | SNP-host
unset | ?? | not SNP
Powered by blists - more mailing lists