[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50a8517d-328e-2178-e98c-4b160456e092@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 16:21:45 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>, hpa@...or.com,
kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com, wei.liu@...nel.org,
decui@...rosoft.com, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, lpieralisi@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
kw@...ux.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, arnd@...db.de,
hch@...radead.org, m.szyprowski@...sung.com, robin.murphy@....com,
thomas.lendacky@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
isaku.yamahata@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
jane.chu@...cle.com, seanjc@...gle.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/12] x86/ioapic: Gate decrypted mapping on
cc_platform_has() attribute
On 11/10/22 22:21, Michael Kelley wrote:
> * Ensure fixmaps for IOAPIC MMIO respect memory encryption pgprot
> * bits, just like normal ioremap():
> */
> - flags = pgprot_decrypted(flags);
> + if (!cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_HAS_PARAVISOR))
> + flags = pgprot_decrypted(flags);
This begs the question whether *all* paravisors will want to avoid a
decrypted ioapic mapping. Is this _fundamental_ to paravisors, or it is
an implementation detail of this _individual_ paravisor?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists