LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com,
	amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 
	<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
	Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with prot_guest_has()
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:00:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRt6yCNCBLwyyx5X@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6c38d6253dc78381f9ff0f1823b6ee5ddeefacc.1628873970.git.thomas.lendacky@amd.com>

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 11:59:24AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
> index edc67ddf065d..5635ca9a1fbe 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ void __init sme_unmap_bootdata(char *real_mode_data)
>  	struct boot_params *boot_data;
>  	unsigned long cmdline_paddr;
>  
> -	if (!sme_active())
> +	if (!amd_prot_guest_has(PATTR_SME))
>  		return;
>  
>  	/* Get the command line address before unmapping the real_mode_data */
> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ void __init sme_map_bootdata(char *real_mode_data)
>  	struct boot_params *boot_data;
>  	unsigned long cmdline_paddr;
>  
> -	if (!sme_active())
> +	if (!amd_prot_guest_has(PATTR_SME))
>  		return;
>  
>  	__sme_early_map_unmap_mem(real_mode_data, sizeof(boot_params), true);
> @@ -378,7 +378,7 @@ bool sev_active(void)
>  	return sev_status & MSR_AMD64_SEV_ENABLED;
>  }
>  
> -bool sme_active(void)
> +static bool sme_active(void)

Just get rid of it altogether. Also, there's an

EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active);

which needs to go under the actual function. Here's a diff ontop:

---
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
index 5635ca9a1fbe..a3a2396362a5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
@@ -364,8 +364,9 @@ int __init early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size)
 /*
  * SME and SEV are very similar but they are not the same, so there are
  * times that the kernel will need to distinguish between SME and SEV. The
- * sme_active() and sev_active() functions are used for this.  When a
- * distinction isn't needed, the mem_encrypt_active() function can be used.
+ * PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT and PATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT flags to
+ * amd_prot_guest_has() are used for this. When a distinction isn't needed,
+ * the mem_encrypt_active() function can be used.
  *
  * The trampoline code is a good example for this requirement.  Before
  * paging is activated, SME will access all memory as decrypted, but SEV
@@ -377,11 +378,6 @@ bool sev_active(void)
 {
 	return sev_status & MSR_AMD64_SEV_ENABLED;
 }
-
-static bool sme_active(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask && !sev_active();
-}
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active);
 
 /* Needs to be called from non-instrumentable code */
@@ -398,7 +394,7 @@ bool amd_prot_guest_has(unsigned int attr)
 
 	case PATTR_SME:
 	case PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT:
-		return sme_active();
+		return sme_me_mask && !sev_active();
 
 	case PATTR_SEV:
 	case PATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT:

>  {
>  	return sme_me_mask && !sev_active();
>  }
> @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
>  	 * device does not support DMA to addresses that include the
>  	 * encryption mask.
>  	 */
> -	if (sme_active()) {
> +	if (amd_prot_guest_has(PATTR_SME)) {

So I'm not sure: you add PATTR_SME which you call with
amd_prot_guest_has() and PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT which you call with
prot_guest_has() and they both end up being the same thing on AMD.

So why even bother with PATTR_SME?

This is only going to cause confusion later and I'd say let's simply use
prot_guest_has(PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT) everywhere...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-17  9:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-13 16:59 [PATCH v2 00/12] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] x86/ioremap: Selectively build arch override encryption functions Tom Lendacky
2021-08-14 15:25   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 17:19   ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
2021-08-14 18:32   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-14 18:49     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-19  9:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-19 16:39     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() Tom Lendacky
2021-08-14 19:08   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-15 13:53     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-15 14:39       ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-17 15:22         ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 18:39           ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-19  9:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-19 17:26     ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-19 18:33     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-19 19:57       ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
2021-08-24  7:14       ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] powerpc/pseries/svm: Add a powerpc " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17  8:35   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-17 14:11     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 12:38   ` Michael Ellerman
2021-08-19  9:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-19 18:34     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with prot_guest_has() Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17  9:00   ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2021-08-17 14:46     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 18:41       ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_active() " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 10:02   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-17 15:26     ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 18:43       ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] x86/sev: Replace occurrences of sev_es_active() " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 10:06   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] treewide: Replace the use of mem_encrypt_active() " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] mm: Remove the now unused mem_encrypt_active() function Tom Lendacky
2021-08-17 10:22   ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-17 10:24     ` Borislav Petkov
2021-08-17 15:30       ` Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] x86/sev: " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] powerpc/pseries/svm: " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] s390/mm: " Tom Lendacky
2021-08-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v2 00/12] Implement generic prot_guest_has() helper function Tom Lendacky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YRt6yCNCBLwyyx5X@zn.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=jroedel@suse.de \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] x86/sme: Replace occurrences of sme_active() with prot_guest_has()' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).