From: "Pratik R. Sampat" <prsampat@amd.com>
To: Tycho Andersen <tycho@kernel.org>
Cc: ashish.kalra@amd.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com,
john.allen@amd.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
davem@davemloft.net, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aik@amd.com, nikunj@amd.com,
michael.roth@amd.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] crypto/ccp: Introduce SNP_VERIFY_MITIGATION command
Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 17:10:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <673592c4-8eca-4b84-9f60-7020327d1afd@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <afitM-Ub50JsTCHz@tycho.pizza>
Hi Tycho,
Missed this one in my mailbox. Thanks for the review!
On 5/4/26 10:32 AM, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 11:20:51AM -0400, Pratik R. Sampat wrote:
>> - failed_status (read-only): firmware-reported failure status from the
>> last operation, as returned alongside the status vectors
>
> "from the last operation" is not quite right here, it looks like it
> re-runs the STATUS command and reports that error?
That is correct. It runs the STATUS command and reports the status of the
verification operation. Probably better to phrase it as the "last verification
operation" instead?
>
>> + failed_status: Read only interface that reports the status of
>> + the verification operation.
>
> This should probably also note that it runs a fresh operation.
>
Ack.
> I was trying to think of a nice way to report the status of the last
> operation short of caching it, but I didn't come up with anything
> good. I don't think it's important enough to cache, the failure codes
> right now are all for things that would persist across runs.
>
Right, I didn't want to leave room for any ambiguity so avoided caching it for
one additional call.
If the failure status is set, we do fail the VERIFY op as well, but I wasn't
too sure how to report that failure without an additional interface like this.
--Pratik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-08 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260501152051.17469-1-prsampat@amd.com>
2026-05-04 14:32 ` [RFC v2] crypto/ccp: Introduce SNP_VERIFY_MITIGATION command Tycho Andersen
2026-05-08 21:10 ` Pratik R. Sampat [this message]
2026-05-11 14:25 ` Tycho Andersen
2026-05-11 16:21 ` Pratik R. Sampat
2026-05-11 16:52 ` Tycho Andersen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=673592c4-8eca-4b84-9f60-7020327d1afd@amd.com \
--to=prsampat@amd.com \
--cc=aik@amd.com \
--cc=ashish.kalra@amd.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=john.allen@amd.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--cc=nikunj@amd.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=tycho@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox