linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/16] x86/amd_nb: Move SMN access code to a new amd

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: <20241105145826.GC916505@yaz-khff2.amd.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 09:58:26 -0500
From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tony.luck@...el.com, x86@...nel.org, avadhut.naik@....com,
	john.allen@....com, mario.limonciello@....com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
	Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com, richard.gong@....com, jdelvare@...e.com,
	linux@...ck-us.net, clemens@...isch.de, hdegoede@...hat.com,
	ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
	naveenkrishna.chatradhi@....com, carlos.bilbao.osdev@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/16] x86/amd_nb: Move SMN access code to a new amd_smn
 driver

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 05:21:44PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > index ba5252d8e21c..a03ffa5b6bb1 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> > @@ -3128,6 +3128,9 @@ config AMD_NODE
> >  	def_bool y
> >  	depends on CPU_SUP_AMD && PCI
> >  
> > +config AMD_SMN
> > +	def_bool y
> > +	depends on AMD_NODE
> 
> Why is this a separate compilation unit and not part of amd_node.c? Especially
> if it depends on it.
> 
> I don't see the real need for having smaller compilation units. Both the node
> and the smn stuff will end up being built-in in 99% of the configs. So why are
> we making separate Kconfig items and yadda yadda?
> 

AMD_NB (legacy systems) and AMD_SMN (Zen-based systems) would both
depend on AMD_NODE. The thinking is that a user could build a minimal
config for either legacy or Zen-based systems.

> Just do a single amd_node and that's it. We can always split later, if really
> needed.
>

Okay, will do.

Thanks,
Yazen