linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/boot: Implement early memory acceptance for SEV-SNP

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: <9f689ba2-add6-cca2-e7b3-fa0393fe2b98@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 13:05:01 -0500
From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
 Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>,
 linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Kevin Loughlin <kevinloughlin@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/boot: Implement early memory acceptance for
 SEV-SNP

On 4/7/25 04:25, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 08:07:03AM -0700, Dionna Amalie Glaze wrote:
>> If the GHCB is available, we should always prefer it.
> 
> I believe we should consider the cost of code duplication in this
> situation.
> 
> If the non-early version is only used in the kexec path, it will not be
> tested as frequently and could be more easily broken. I think it would be
> acceptable for kexec to be slightly slower if it results in more
> maintainable code.
> 

Is accept_memory() in the decompressor or efistub only used in the kexec
path?

Thanks,
Tom