Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1522837
| From | Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME |
| Date | 2016-11-15 16:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDO02-6JS-37@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sBVfj-4HF-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDKSt-4PB-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDKSt-4PB-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDKSt-4PB-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDO02-6JS-39@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 08:40:05AM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> The feature may be present and enabled even if it is not currently
> active. In other words, the SYS_CFG MSR bit could be set but we aren't
> actually using encryption (sme_me_mask is 0). As long as the SYS_CFG
> MSR bit is set we need to take into account the physical reduction in
> address space.
But later in the series I see sme_early_mem_enc() which tests exactly
that mask.
And in patch 12 you have:
+ /*
+ * If memory encryption is active, the trampoline area will need to
+ * be in un-encrypted memory in order to bring up other processors
+ * successfully.
+ */
+ sme_early_mem_dec(__pa(base), size);
+ sme_set_mem_unenc(base, size);
What's up?
IOW, it all sounds to me like you want to have an sme_active() helper
and use it everywhere.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> - 2016-11-15 13:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-11-15 13:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-11-15 16:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-11-15 17:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/20] x86: Handle reduction in physical address size with SME Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2016-11-15 22:40 +0100
csiph-web