[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240517192341.GXZkeuvZmXug5gSbH7@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 21:23:41 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, svsm-devel@...onut-svsm.dev,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/15] x86/sev: Use kernel provided SVSM Calling Areas
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 03:09:02PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> If we're not running at VMPL0 (based on the RMPADJUST check) and if the SVSM
> doesn't advertise a non-zero VMPL value, we will self-terminate. So those
> values are only set if we are not running at VMPL0 and the SVSM has provided
> a non-zero value to us.
>
> I'm going to turn the function into a bool function so that the call
> becomes:
>
> if (!svsm_setup_caa(cc_info))
> return;
Sure, I guess I'm misled by the
if (bla)
sev_es_terminate()
which is a function call but I need to read its name to realize that
after that point we're either terminated or we have all the stuff
required to run on a SVSM.
> I do. I think you're missing the RMPADJUST check that causes the function to
> return early if we're running at VMPL0.
Yap.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists