Re: [PATCHv8 06/14] efi/x86: Implement support for unaccepted memory
From: Kirill A. Shutemov <hidden>
Date: 2023-03-25 00:52:08
Also in:
linux-efi, linux-mm, lkml
On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 03:20:55PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
quoted
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig index 6787ed8dfacf..8aa8adf0bcb5 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig@@ -314,6 +314,20 @@ config EFI_COCO_SECRET virt/coco/efi_secret module to access the secrets, which in turn allows userspace programs to access the injected secrets. +config UNACCEPTED_MEMORY + bool + depends on EFI_STUBThis still doesn't make a whole lotta sense. If I do "make menuconfig" I don't see the help text because that bool doesn't have a string prompt. So who is that help text for?
It is a form of documentation for a developer. The same happens for other options. For instance, BOOT_VESA_SUPPORT or ARCH_HAS_CURRENT_STACK_POINTER. Yes, it is not visible user, but I still think it is helpful for a developer to understand what the option does.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Then, in the last patch you have--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig@@ -888,6 +888,8 @@ config INTEL_TDX_GUEST select ARCH_HAS_CC_PLATFORM select X86_MEM_ENCRYPT select X86_MCE + select UNACCEPTED_MEMORY + select EFI_STUBI guess you want to select UNACCEPTED_MEMORY only.
I had to rework it as config INTEL_TDX_GUEST ... depends on EFI_STUB select UNACCEPTED_MEMORY Naked select UNACCEPTED_MEMORY doesn't work if EFI and EFI_STUB is disabled: WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for UNACCEPTED_MEMORY Depends on [n]: EFI [=n] && EFI_STUB [=n] Selected by [y]: - INTEL_TDX_GUEST [=y] && HYPERVISOR_GUEST [=y] && X86_64 [=y] && CPU_SUP_INTEL [=y] && X86_X2APIC [=y] IIUC, the alternative is to have selects all the way down the option tree.
And I've already mentioned this whole mess: https://lore.kernel.org/r/Yt%2BnOeLMqRxjObbx@zn.tnic (local) Please incorporate all review comments before sending a new version of your patch. Ignoring review feedback is a very unfriendly thing to do: - if you agree with the feedback, you work it in in the next revision - if you don't agree, you *say* *why* you don't
Sorry, it was not my intention. I misread your comment and focused on build issues around the option. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov