From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([185.25.65.24]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1dJP3f-0007Ay-Dq for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 18:54:57 +0000 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 10/34] x86, x86/mm, x86/xen, olpc: Use __va() against just the physical address in cr3 References: <20170607191309.28645.15241.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> <20170607191453.28645.92256.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net> <4a7376fb-abfc-8edd-42b7-38de461ac65e@amd.com> <67fe69ac-a213-8de3-db28-0e54bba95127@oracle.com> <12c7e511-996d-cf60-3a3b-0be7b41bd85b@oracle.com> <9725c503-2e33-2365-87f5-f017e1cbe9b6@amd.com> <8e8eac45-95be-f1b5-6f44-f131d275f7bc@oracle.com> From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: <2d507507-8736-89ff-0579-c2eee4b3ac34@citrix.com> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:54:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8e8eac45-95be-f1b5-6f44-f131d275f7bc@oracle.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Boris Ostrovsky , Tom Lendacky , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: Brijesh Singh , Toshimitsu Kani , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Matt Fleming , Alexander Potapenko , "H. Peter Anvin" , Larry Woodman , Jonathan Corbet , Joerg Roedel , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Ingo Molnar , Andrey Ryabinin , Dave Young , Rik van Riel , Arnd Bergmann , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , Dmitry Vyukov , Juergen Gross , xen-devel , Paolo Bonzini On 09/06/17 19:43, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 06/09/2017 02:36 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: >>> basis, although (as far as I am aware) Xen as a whole would be able to >>> encompass itself and all of its PV guests inside one single SME >>> instance. >> Yes, that is correct. Thinking more about this, it would only be possible if all the PV guests were SME-aware and understood not to choke when it finds a frame with a high address bit set. I expect the only viable way to implement this (should we wish) is to have PV guests explicitly signal support (probably via an ELF note), after which it needs to know about the existence of SME, the meaning of the encrypted bit in PTEs, and to defer all configuration responsibility to Xen. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec