linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 04/19] x86: Secure Launch Resource Table header file

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]

Message-Id: <D1SPFVXS6FOG.IQQB3INFYEF2@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 09:02:39 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: <ross.philipson@...cle.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 <x86@...nel.org>, <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
 <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
 <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 <mingo@...hat.com>, <bp@...en8.de>, <hpa@...or.com>,
 <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <ardb@...nel.org>, <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
 <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, <peterhuewe@....de>,
 <jgg@...pe.ca>, <luto@...capital.net>, <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
 <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <corbet@....net>,
 <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <dwmw2@...radead.org>, <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
 <kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com>, <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
 <trenchboot-devel@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/19] x86: Secure Launch Resource Table header file

On Wed Jun 5, 2024 at 10:03 PM EEST,  wrote:
> So I did not mean to imply that DRTM support on various 
> platforms/architectures has a short expiration date. In fact we are 
> actively working on DRTM support through the TrenchBoot project on 
> several platforms/architectures. Just a quick rundown here:
>
> Intel: Plenty of Intel platforms are vPro with TXT. It is really just 
> the lower end systems that don't have it available (like Core i3). And 
> my guess was wrong about x86s. You can find the spec on the page in the 
> following link. There is an entire subsection on SMX support on x86s and 
> the changes to the various GETSEC instruction leaves that were made to 
> make it work there (see 3.15).
>
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html

Happend to bump into same PDF specification and exactly the seeked
information is "3.15 SMX Changes". So just write this down to some
patch that starts adding SMX things.

Link: https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/776648

So link and document, and other stuff above is not relevant from
upstream context, only potential maintenance burden :-)

For any architectures dig a similar fact:

1. Is not dead.
2. Will be there also in future.

Make any architecture existentially relevant for and not too much
coloring in the text that is easy to check.

It is nearing 5k lines so you should be really good with measured
facts too (not just launch) :-)

BR, Jarkko