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 4FD4A1C68F; Mon, 4 May 2026 14:32:56 +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=1777905176; cv=none; b=kiURkDum1ZifHbsBYJPbAgZW6YnJjJcfexL8QgJU2IUF/eIIgFKRI1yJJ8yzmalV24RA6JrG0O4mh13uSPYBZKQ6ge85p8CuXzFDY4ABOTRREuQ0eiToLa5+aM6mDQ6SMv5crzZuBC90/7ucI8qLfCNpexHKpqctvru4VR6gkd4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777905176; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TnJP/izr7dE1Z7AMSQjNxeTgP5zcgPXsdrR5ISmWgfo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZN/PrFbMN0Pw90ememeE0fdOxUd0qWKTEZ7LckZX+6cZoXbGckofpJhYz+8fzYItMl0wDSITatiNFHrDgIYD5ytgcLWEZEK+p+qbjffzeWkF0gPUwYDErazkzUPVF6EpC8qaR0wwX6P5UEFOmSxoMOzMN2JS3OZAETJmoj2A9Eo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ESgWLJrN; 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="ESgWLJrN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A1ABFC2BCB8; Mon, 4 May 2026 14:32:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1777905175; bh=TnJP/izr7dE1Z7AMSQjNxeTgP5zcgPXsdrR5ISmWgfo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ESgWLJrNBP2tcgnLjHKA6WPh1it/zjbFLiXklCc6OJ6PvtmewljilJ/r3o7qrQHqf aXEOowWI+S++pPvwf47/r6U7BZ9qR0OLU+uJ33PceO8v7sveOTPz4zMHTeX9y0/LzA AnjL2ri/YPImcUc5poKdjFyyo1SCa+LY6JbqhKesLDFwWMTOWV01OrysfSZDtxhlao hV/pAcy6pgF/OJmbTJc4I2dusLvEb2EahfrE4PJAkeVqz5NaCTKWOzotZHmSlUkQ0M u1IpCMqPq9TroozxUPJZRXfDFJTanLjDEPkjADcy1b6Dp9Ioia4zvOvWbACN+wWQfX GTSf4SjjjOWvQ== Date: Mon, 4 May 2026 08:32:53 -0600 From: Tycho Andersen To: "Pratik R. Sampat" 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 Message-ID: References: <20260501152051.17469-1-prsampat@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: <20260501152051.17469-1-prsampat@amd.com> 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? > + failed_status: Read only interface that reports the status of > + the verification operation. This should probably also note that it runs a fresh operation. 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. Tycho