linux-kernel - Re: [RFT PATCH v2 00/23] x86: strict separation of startup code

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: <CAMj1kXE7Ctbsu+z2WST9s22NFvPVXoymPfidjJSXgdfvtWZVxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 16:55:23 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, 
	Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>, Kevin Loughlin <kevinloughlin@...gle.com>, 
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v2 00/23] x86: strict separation of startup code

On Sun, 4 May 2025 at 16:04, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
...
>
> So to move this forward I applied the following 7 patches to
> tip:x86/boot:
>
>         x86/boot: Move early_setup_gdt() back into head64.c
>         x86/boot: Disregard __supported_pte_mask in __startup_64()
>         x86/sev: Make sev_snp_enabled() a static function
>         x86/sev: Move instruction decoder into separate source file
>         x86/linkage: Add SYM_PIC_ALIAS() macro helper to emit symbol aliases
>         x86/boot: Add a bunch of PIC aliases
>         x86/boot: Provide __pti_set_user_pgtbl() to startup code
>
> Which are I believe independent of SEV testing.
>

Excellent.

> I also merged in pending upstream fixes, including:
>
>    8ed12ab1319b ("x86/boot/sev: Support memory acceptance in the EFI stub under SVSM")
>
> Which should make tip:x86/boot a good base for your series going
> forward?
>

Yes, that helps a lot, thanks.

Please also consider the patch

  x86/sev: Disentangle #VC handling code from startup code
  11 files changed, 1694 insertions(+), 1643 deletions(-)

It just moves code around, but it is rather large and is likely to
cause merge conflicts if it lives out of tree for too long. The +/-
delta is mostly down to the fact that a new file vc-handle.c is added
which duplicates most of the #includes of the file that it was split
off from.