From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DB11C433EF for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:25:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C938A6B0088; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 02:25:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C421D6B0089; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 02:25:30 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B317E6B008A; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 02:25:30 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0181.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.181]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34306B0088 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 02:25:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9651812690D for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:25:20 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78890162400.28.5186D30 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE1F43000100 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DDA1B816A7; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:25:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F4DAC341C1; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:25:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1638861917; bh=3+EBEsclmdbVbmRJP9A28/FcBv3FGPKlb25nC+tN2eY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=e5YgUf73UNZ0b/yOZ3VUpPzUsCta77XV7QUKl31k8FH9jWb6pGCNEN8yXiwmC0Y71 jTPwiSpJg1Sf5FsypTQENIUj1xQWjAXgb8Inrwnl0wDGAc5YPJo5ceZjdphsEbtvZ0 f5MQNQDYRf9ykL8gxqCX1ASNQYmMyFlcTzxhMQ6M2+1r/rwBoiWE4GkJGzlJujDMSP /AzN7MAAdq5NM/Khl1lfjL4IOLT0B3RQTOnw/pQSeUutJa2vuTSAfDl1fU9NTDiXgY C5sNIWghTjrwiaGN30TWcgVKcxmcvSrrLeIR20A6HOSQOqTzV6qxJOmCqtG8ZBHX3q Y54HQXzKWkbzw== Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:25:04 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: Richard Hughes Cc: Martin Fernandez , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, ardb@kernel.org, dvhart@infradead.org, andy@infradead.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, daniel.gutson@eclypsium.com, alex.bazhaniuk@eclypsium.com, alison.schofield@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] x86: Show in sysfs if a memory node is able to do encryption Message-ID: References: <20211203192148.585399-1-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DE1F43000100 X-Stat-Signature: 5t3hko6mpyy7aj4w6msz7b1heubg4u3s Authentication-Results: imf09.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=e5YgUf73; spf=pass (imf09.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 145.40.68.75 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org X-HE-Tag: 1638861919-590301 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hi Richard, On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 07:58:10PM +0000, Richard Hughes wrote: > On Sun, 5 Dec 2021 at 06:04, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 04:21:43PM -0300, Martin Fernandez wrote: > > > fwupd project plans to use it as part of a check to see if the users > > > have properly configured memory hardware encryption capabilities. > > I'm missing a description about *how* the new APIs/ABIs are going to be > > used. > > We're planning to use this feature in the Host Security ID checks done > at every boot. Please see > https://fwupd.github.io/libfwupdplugin/hsi.html for details. I'm happy > to answer questions or concerns. Thanks! Can you please describe the actual check for the memory encryption and how it would impact the HSI rating? I wonder, for example, why did you choose per-node reporting rather than per-region as described in UEFI spec. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.