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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B6DC433F5 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:32:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5516B60FE6 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:32:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 5516B60FE6 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=shutemov.name Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4HF13m078kz301N for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:32:52 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=vKVQE5RU; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=shutemov.name (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::12d; helo=mail-lf1-x12d.google.com; envelope-from=kirill@shutemov.name; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=vKVQE5RU; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4HF12z2VwNz2yRK for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:32:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id m3so12814964lfu.2 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 07:32:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=ayCGrHt4GWDBHksaWpDlFPsTDgmCQyv1ZQQyBUlWV+I=; b=vKVQE5RUe8kMs0wun4XuDGO3eTujOGs2RwESdLhyIqK2JwxlqZrlSJy3MrsXJkRafX gBAYy/nccugQKoUll1gn8VoFbzjQhjrLzptB1R76SapyouDJT5ZGJIWbG+FX4hwJyS6V RHRd5aepSbIC42CmHtd5u+dR4xuEL++muo/z0NTk8BMGL92wAA2PmP9KOi2aYe71/Bfr QklC4Nhk0K/0QbQiJZijepS1OZ+jtAxihfchh+jQ4jf5+4U17tQ1xXPBbmD5a5nhc0Gd SVGSB9p7xAW0QvKqL518rFLXTD4w7KZA2wBif/Kp2RKz31Lh+5HyNQaqaSmkfOyisrNC k+Nw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=ayCGrHt4GWDBHksaWpDlFPsTDgmCQyv1ZQQyBUlWV+I=; b=CRpmSJ6lDqTqcWvlONeBJmJXk40KKfMV15W1gKJB81/ZlxTKhSdbii44IXD0ITP6Th BgWXqEH+nL25+O0QH9R5DvrMs6jQeAtEsHEHDhyvXB8vyyak/FEQUhoKxo5FrfIgrAjH A66Y1yDOFnE6GI6r2jLDpDw5eak96Buzn7ixIaWebPaSigIYSQ8h4VTmf2wS/hMLd89N c904rAYKPjaBgYnOmecS29mHbePKsO0bnvYvNR07yI4Bi80EtPnKXZ1z4McVTXXF2op9 KrltOFeK12KMXQ9ho0yPNeLiKnC10wtj5GyHyjv4dhL3YWBASvDG5UFkpSjrAI7MRDpm ZN+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531uxNfBRbVRHxYNf7CEBopFgudDnrZOf6C5AMRweykqNDXGdwIq Co/e7w7+bkpGvCaYQwLouc7auw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3SPlP/oK9QpFHL+xKtQ0nQUgNyOd556PIkN1KxMSQUqIwOiDbPwtupEbWOJByEgde/ChetQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:512:: with SMTP id o18mr35155713ljp.199.1632321016184; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 07:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from box.localdomain ([86.57.175.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y9sm205960lfl.240.2021.09.22.07.30.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Sep 2021 07:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by box.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E147C10304D; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 17:30:15 +0300 (+03) Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 17:30:15 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Tom Lendacky Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with cc_platform_has() Message-ID: <20210922143015.vvxvh6ec73lffvkf@box.shutemov.name> References: <367624d43d35d61d5c97a8b289d9ddae223636e9.1631141919.git.thomas.lendacky@amd.com> <20210920192341.maue7db4lcbdn46x@box.shutemov.name> <77df37e1-0496-aed5-fd1d-302180f1edeb@amd.com> <20210921212059.wwlytlmxoft4cdth@box.shutemov.name> <20210921213401.i2pzaotgjvn4efgg@box.shutemov.name> <00f52bf8-cbc6-3721-f40e-2f51744751b0@amd.com> <20210921215830.vqxd75r4eyau6cxy@box.shutemov.name> <01891f59-7ec3-cf62-a8fc-79f79ca76587@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01891f59-7ec3-cf62-a8fc-79f79ca76587@amd.com> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Brijesh Singh , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Dave Hansen , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Joerg Roedel , x86@kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Christoph Hellwig , Ingo Molnar , linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com, Tianyu Lan , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:40:43AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 9/21/21 4:58 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 04:43:59PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > > > On 9/21/21 4:34 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:27:17PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 12:20:59AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > > > > I still believe calling cc_platform_has() from __startup_64() is totally > > > > > > broken as it lacks proper wrapping while accessing global variables. > > > > > > > > > > Well, one of the issues on the AMD side was using boot_cpu_data too > > > > > early and the Intel side uses it too. Can you replace those checks with > > > > > is_tdx_guest() or whatever was the helper's name which would check > > > > > whether the the kernel is running as a TDX guest, and see if that helps? > > > > > > > > There's no need in Intel check this early. Only AMD need it. Maybe just > > > > opencode them? > > > > > > Any way you can put a gzipped/bzipped copy of your vmlinux file somewhere I > > > can grab it from and take a look at it? > > > > You can find broken vmlinux and bzImage here: > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Fdrive%2Ffolders%2F1n74vUQHOGebnF70Im32qLFY8iS3wvjIs%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cthomas.lendacky%40amd.com%7C1c7adf380cbe4c1a6bb708d97d4af6ff%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637678583935705530%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=gA30x%2Bfu97tUx0p2UqI8HgjiL8bxDbK1GqgJBbUrUE4%3D&reserved=0 > > > > Let me know when I can remove it. > > Looking at everything, it is all RIP relative addressing, so those > accesses should be fine. Not fine, but waiting to blowup with random build environment change. > Your image has the intel_cc_platform_has() > function, does it work if you remove that call? Because I think it may be > the early call into that function which looks like it has instrumentation > that uses %gs in __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc and %gs is not setup properly > yet. And since boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor will likely be zero this early it > will match X86_VENDOR_INTEL and call into that function. Right removing call to intel_cc_platform_has() or moving it to cc_platform.c fixes the issue. -- Kirill A. Shutemov