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 72420C4338F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:55:21 +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 CD991610CF for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:55:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org CD991610CF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org 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 4Gr0WC34S9z3cJp for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 19:55:19 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=hdp6qYYI; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=casper.srs.infradead.org (client-ip=2001:8b0:10b:1236::1; helo=casper.infradead.org; envelope-from=batv+308e20cad7c5f5b5e2f7+6570+infradead.org+hch@casper.srs.infradead.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=hdp6qYYI; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) (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 4Gr0VX4XlKz2yM0 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 19:54:44 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=30I+7nEm5zbvXFaNjeCP/URwvn0lUxkdZ8/N2SFqU4g=; b=hdp6qYYIiawPbHWzGgJGbeGDoL TskujUOUgkw5fqQ32Dq09FqOv51wvLWbNrcrdw3wg7CGsAtqwE0y+rW5EzXhdMJx/nO7U+/vDSAxy ZGC4r6aC4wc44wp1pn/5iT/tBmcMPk/3CafPQ6Y6Tjjhb6zYRI/6S5OA4cG/Qk8BIe9OYWnnx7d8w 7GhnTeyRi2ZmTBFWwHRyV84JdQ6eKrGvxUZFLENaT0zcmJ62SNY0OjvyFBg+eHiiFyXh1CKCQ5zLg 4phvLD2DSvHmVFPqRiYmTfBtb2/AVqElq02npejAimvBLZXPdunESEx0AVEqb2PzRTbXPbtdOrilL U+nUWJXA==; Received: from hch by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mGejF-004tP2-Ci; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:53:07 +0000 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 10:52:53 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Tom Lendacky Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() Message-ID: References: <7d55bac0cf2e73f53816bce3a3097877ed9663f3.1628873970.git.thomas.lendacky@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7d55bac0cf2e73f53816bce3a3097877ed9663f3.1628873970.git.thomas.lendacky@amd.com> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html 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, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Joerg Roedel , x86@kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com, Joerg Roedel , 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 Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 11:59:22AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > While the name suggests this is intended mainly for guests, it will > also be used for host memory encryption checks in place of sme_active(). Which suggest that the name is not good to start with. Maybe protected hardware, system or platform might be a better choice? > +static inline bool prot_guest_has(unsigned int attr) > +{ > +#ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT > + if (sme_me_mask) > + return amd_prot_guest_has(attr); > +#endif > + > + return false; > +} Shouldn't this be entirely out of line? > +/* 0x800 - 0x8ff reserved for AMD */ > +#define PATTR_SME 0x800 > +#define PATTR_SEV 0x801 > +#define PATTR_SEV_ES 0x802 Why do we need reservations for a purely in-kernel namespace? And why are you overoading a brand new generic API with weird details of a specific implementation like this?