Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with... | linuxppc-dev

[PATCH 00/11] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
[PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> · 2021-07-28
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> · 2021-07-28
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> · 2021-08-11
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-11
[PATCH 02/11] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() · Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> · 2021-07-28
Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-29
Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
[PATCH 03/11] powerpc/pseries/svm: Add a powerpc version of prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
[PATCH 04/11] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 04/11] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with prot_guest_has() · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
[PATCH 05/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 05/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_active() with prot_guest_has() · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
[PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-07-30
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-09
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Christophe Leroy <hidden> · 2021-08-02
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-09
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> · 2021-08-10
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-10
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> · 2021-08-10
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Kirill A. Shutemov <hidden> · 2021-08-11
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-11
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Kirill A. Shutemov <hidden> · 2021-08-12
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-13
Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-13
[PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest_has() · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest_has() · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-09
Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest_has() · "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> · 2021-08-09
[PATCH 08/11] mm: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 08/11] mm: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
[PATCH 09/11] x86/sev: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 09/11] x86/sev: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> · 2021-08-02
[PATCH 10/11] powerpc/pseries/svm: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
[PATCH 11/11] s390/mm: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-07-27
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function · Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> · 2021-07-28
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function · "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> · 2021-08-09
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function · Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> · 2021-08-09

Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() with prot_guest_has()

From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Date: 2021-08-09 21:59:08
Also in: amd-gfx, dri-devel, kexec, kvm, linux-efi, linux-fsdevel, linux-iommu, linux-s390, lkml, platform-driver-x86

On 8/2/21 5:45 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:26:09PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:

quoted

@@ -48,7 +47,7 @@ static void sme_sev_setup_real_mode(struct trampoline_header *th)
 	if (prot_guest_has(PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT))
 		th->flags |= TH_FLAGS_SME_ACTIVE;
 
-	if (sev_es_active()) {
+	if (prot_guest_has(PATTR_GUEST_PROT_STATE)) {
 		/*
 		 * Skip the call to verify_cpu() in secondary_startup_64 as it
 		 * will cause #VC exceptions when the AP can't handle them yet.

Not sure how TDX will handle AP booting, are you sure it needs this
special setup as well? Otherwise a check for SEV-ES would be better
instead of the generic PATTR_GUEST_PROT_STATE.

Yes, I'm not sure either. I figure that change can be made, if needed, as
part of the TDX support.

Thanks,
Tom

Regards,

Joerg

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help