linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/24] x86/sev: Separate MSR and GHCB based 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: <20250711205944.GDaHF7QAvRhPZOWMX_@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 22:59:44 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>,
	Kevin Loughlin <kevinloughlin@...gle.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/24] x86/sev: Separate MSR and GHCB based
 snp_cpuid() via a callback

On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 10:12:48AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> Not sure the renaming makes it read any easier or say anything more. It
> does add extra changes to the diff that have to be read through, though,
> so I don't think it is beneficial.

So it really comes natural to split them into a msr_prot and a ghcb_prot
variant. If we added a separate patch ontop that does only the renaming, then
that would probably be more churn than necessary.

> Maybe rename this parameter to snp_cpuid or snp_cpuid_fn or similar,
> because it can be very confusing to see "cpuid" on its own like this.a

Yeah, that's a good point - snp_cpuid_fn clearly states that it is a function
pointer and not *the* cpuid() function.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette