linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 8.2/9] x86/virt/tdx: Reduce TDMR's reserved areas by using CMRs to find memory holes

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: <86302cfb-7272-4477-b311-e10958ce096f@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:58:33 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
 <seanjc@...gle.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
 "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "hpa@...or.com"
 <hpa@...or.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
 "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
 "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
 "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
 "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
 "nik.borisov@...e.com" <nik.borisov@...e.com>,
 "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
 "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 8.2/9] x86/virt/tdx: Reduce TDMR's reserved areas by
 using CMRs to find memory holes

On 12/9/24 20:24, Huang, Kai wrote:
> OK.  I would like to get the solution agreed.  IIUC you prefer to just using
> CMRs to build TDX-usable memory regions when constructing TDMRs.  Please let me
> know if I have misunderstanding.
> 
> Please let me know if you are OK with this solution?

I honestly don't know.

What I would prefer is that you take another hard look at the code and
deeply consider whether there's a simpler solution. My gut says that the
8.2/9 patch is too much of a band-aid and adds too much complexity. I'm
yearning for something simpler.

I'm not going to know whether I'm OK with the solution until the patch
lands in my inbox. What I do know is that I'd really appreciate if you
could _explore_ a simpler solution.