From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27A36326952; Mon, 2 Mar 2026 21:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772486439; cv=none; b=ry3cZ77XsJ2sUYn/fvOeIP1t4hHzokDD20yvqcOClQyf4baGvT/3svSi6CLFpOf+An2z3HzfAHReg+//sdbN02iNOb1dS1TE20XF4RfRDXqTD+RBHiw2kJ/c840KKEQbeZAXvux33kcoZsYTd0F8J86uz90J6k8hhwQGxabYC6o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772486439; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YGALtDZlEiD2F1T9KtPan3LNnqM1FDj8xY10c0Wlkm4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=W+Ggcpq5m1ZvENg12bsIsj1lDx8nZktQebaEoL8YfoPd5apnOhHzIuS768g8BdbMW5/uJUlDQfSEKbjwVpoThZ9ibTLGWKl+wCgRj0uWRREngSoEhCk5m1sqxSbHeT9InJUc/vVzjHeyGgdQtQxXh+dfSRiOl5ahICRWxOvasEA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lrAKQVys; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lrAKQVys" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D2C27C19423; Mon, 2 Mar 2026 21:20:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1772486438; bh=YGALtDZlEiD2F1T9KtPan3LNnqM1FDj8xY10c0Wlkm4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=lrAKQVysVibqoBBDvK32W+UtmBfwhDTgkU4caaXs0YlSmgTwV7PM6me8HUIrNoBg6 gkxqhFRh1txnPiK9ju34RrgrSsf+yr+C8SigVSbz4ECjpi3JyVRXEAnNnt3K4oVjl4 bINVRc+e0XOd2zHjxwSC8r4Wl3Dv31RvQ9lD+BXvBj3kGQsh//U3OIGd20z9H/LUEs jRn9mY62lxWR2P1PljbzzE12cJ+2BfIS9zrAPO59aQqJMMMgY2iNkeA+/Rqz+raxIx 3TvIj4HWeoBtjiTUaSOfnluG84DL6RoQnpNgG5W9iW6wMr1xhXnAsGgidrDZXV4Z/Y g8JK1KEQ6kw5g== Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 14:20:35 -0700 From: Tycho Andersen To: Tom Lendacky Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Ashish Kalra , John Allen , Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , Ard Biesheuvel , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Nikunj A Dadhania , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Kim Phillips , Sean Christopherson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] x86/snp: create snp_x86_shutdown() Message-ID: References: <20260302191334.937981-1-tycho@kernel.org> <20260302191334.937981-10-tycho@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Tom, On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 02:35:38PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > > +void snp_x86_shutdown(void) > > +{ > > Would it make sense to check for SNP being enabled before calling the > functions below? I realize each of the functions in question will do > that, but it could save a bunch of IPI's with the on_each_cpu() if SNP > is still enabled. Not a big deal either way, so: It is guarded at the call site by: if (data.x86_snp_shutdown && !WARN_ON_ONCE(syscfg & MSR_AMD64_SYSCFG_SNP_EN)) { if (!panic) snp_x86_shutdown(); but we could push that into here to protect any future callers. If we require a v2 I will make the fix. > Reviewed-by: Tom Lendacky Thanks for this and the others! Tycho