[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f751ffe7-9900-4d91-9e7a-e560777725e1@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:25:23 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Pavan Kumar Paluri <papaluri@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Eric Van Tassell <Eric.VanTassell@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] nosnp sev command line support
On 9/30/24 16:11, Pavan Kumar Paluri wrote:
> Provide "nosnp" boot option via "sev=nosnp" kernel command line to
> prevent SEV-SNP[1] capable host kernel from enabling SEV-SNP and
> initializing Reverse Map Table (RMP) [1].
>
> On providing sev=nosnp via kernel command line:
> cat /sys/module/kvm_amd/parameters/sev_snp should be "N".
I don't see any mention in the changelog, cover letter or Documentation/
about why someone would want to do this.
I assume it's because of performance (walking the RMP table is non-zero
cost).
The BIOS allocates the RMP table, right? So this option presumably gets
the performance back, but not the memory. That's probably also worth
mentioning ... somewhere.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists