Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1727291
| From | Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: SME/32-bit regression |
| Date | 2017-09-06 11:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <umEOK-85j-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <umzvH-3X8-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 11:45:07PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> It appears there is a regression for 32-bit kernels due to SME changes.
>
> I bisected my particular problem
It being? Doesn't boot, splats?
> (Xen PV guest) to
> 21729f81ce8ae76a6995681d40e16f7ce8075db4 but I also saw pmd_clear_bad()
> errors on baremetal. This seems to be caused by sme_me_mask being an
> unsigned long as opposed to phys_addr_t (the actual problem is that
> __PHYSICAL_MASK is truncated). When I declare it as u64 and drop unsigned
> long cast in __sme_set()/__sme_clr() the problem goes way. (This presumably
> won't work for non-PAE which I haven't tried).
Right, so I think we should do this because those macros should not have
any effect on !CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT setups.
---
diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
index 1255f09f5e42..823eec6ba951 100644
--- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ static inline unsigned long sme_get_me_mask(void)
return sme_me_mask;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
/*
* The __sme_set() and __sme_clr() macros are useful for adding or removing
* the encryption mask from a value (e.g. when dealing with pagetable
@@ -42,6 +43,10 @@ static inline unsigned long sme_get_me_mask(void)
*/
#define __sme_set(x) ((unsigned long)(x) | sme_me_mask)
#define __sme_clr(x) ((unsigned long)(x) & ~sme_me_mask)
+#else
+#define __sme_set(x) (x)
+#define __sme_clr(x) (x)
+#endif
#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
--
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
SME/32-bit regression Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2017-09-06 05:50 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-09-06 11:30 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-09-06 11:50 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-09-06 18:50 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-09-06 20:30 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2017-09-06 23:10 +0200
[PATCH] x86/mm: Make the SME mask a u64 Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-09-07 11:40 +0200
[tip:x86/urgent] x86/mm: Make the SME mask a u64 tip-bot for Borislav Petkov <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2017-09-07 12:40 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-09-06 16:00 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2017-09-06 16:10 +0200
Re: SME/32-bit regression Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> - 2017-09-06 16:00 +0200
csiph-web