linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] arm64: Detect if in a realm and set RIPAS RAM

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: Thu, 16 May 2024 15:32:08 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
Cc: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>,
	Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
	Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@...amperecomputing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] arm64: Detect if in a realm and set RIPAS RAM

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:18:13AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 10/05/2024 18:35, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 09:42:01AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > > +void arm64_setup_memory(void)
> > 
> > I would give this function a better name, something to resemble the RSI
> > setup. Similarly for others like set_memory_range_protected/shared().
> > Some of the functions have 'rsi' in the name like arm64_rsi_init() but
> > others don't and at a first look they'd seem like some generic memory
> > setup on arm64, not RSI-specific.
> 
> Ack. arm64_rsi_setup_memory() ? I agree, we should "rsi" fy the names.

This should work. We also have rsi_*() functions without any 'arm64' but
those are strictly about communicating with the RMM, so that's fine.

> > > @@ -293,6 +294,8 @@ void __init __no_sanitize_address setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> > >   	 * cpufeature code and early parameters.
> > >   	 */
> > >   	jump_label_init();
> > > +	/* Init RSI after jump_labels are active */
> > > +	arm64_rsi_init();
> > >   	parse_early_param();
> > 
> > Does it need to be this early? It's fine for now but I wonder whether we
> > may have some early parameter at some point that could influence what we
> > do in the arm64_rsi_init(). I'd move it after or maybe even as part of
> > the arm64_setup_memory(), though I haven't read the following patches if
> > they update this function.
> 
> We must do this before we setup the "earlycon", so that the console
> is accessed using shared alias and that happens via parse_early_param() :-(.

Ah, ok, makes sense.

-- 
Catalin