Re: [PATCH 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_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 07/11] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() with prot_guest_has()

From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
Date: 2021-08-10 18:45:13
Also in: amd-gfx, dri-devel, kexec, kvm, linux-efi, linux-fsdevel, linux-iommu, linux-s390, lkml, platform-driver-x86


On 7/27/21 3:26 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:

quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
index de01903c3735..cafed6456d45 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
  #include <linux/start_kernel.h>
  #include <linux/io.h>
  #include <linux/memblock.h>
-#include <linux/mem_encrypt.h>
+#include <linux/protected_guest.h>
  #include <linux/pgtable.h>
  
  #include <asm/processor.h>

@@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ unsigned long __head __startup_64(unsigned long physaddr,
  	 * there is no need to zero it after changing the memory encryption
  	 * attribute.
  	 */
-	if (mem_encrypt_active()) {
+	if (prot_guest_has(PATTR_MEM_ENCRYPT)) {
  		vaddr = (unsigned long)__start_bss_decrypted;
  		vaddr_end = (unsigned long)__end_bss_decrypted;


Since this change is specific to AMD, can you replace PATTR_MEM_ENCRYPT with
prot_guest_has(PATTR_SME) || prot_guest_has(PATTR_SEV). It is not used in
TDX.

-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer

`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