From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29E89C2B9F4 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 17:05:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00B9F6102A for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 17:05:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231250AbhFQRHW (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 13:07:22 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:48820 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229784AbhFQRHT (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 13:07:19 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0eb200a2ba6960566addd7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0e:b200:a2ba:6960:566a:ddd7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 49FC51EC0587; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 19:05:09 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1623949509; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=L8efLSpUhyaEMmGw2xebh6U+9/gmONiS7Hq0tHA+th8=; b=OfBSQjo7MxE/7Oi8VDTmesKbBLWAIZNi2B9GQxVvU14IRK37dT/w+cT2RWQxwPRLJGIcem WQlWQAag4e6OWZuIpGNHr/R7yc8Md+x6gOLiYN/lwkVRIT8KFVlDFj76ckX4oAqFuPfUl0 17TdEVbvXxNlMyxPsXCWL2BpfTSyzbk= Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 19:05:00 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Andy Lutomirski , Peter H Anvin , Dave Hansen , Tony Luck , Dan Williams , Andi Kleen , Kirill Shutemov , Sean Christopherson , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] x86/x86: Add early_is_tdx_guest() interface Message-ID: References: <20210612210445.2164948-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210612210445.2164948-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 02:04:45PM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote: > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] x86/x86: Add early_is_tdx_guest() interface Subject prefix should be "x86/tdx:" ofc. > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..ddfa4a6d1939 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/tdx.c > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +/* > + * tdx.c - Early boot code for TDX > + */ > + > +#include Please no kernel proper includes in the decompressor stage - that thing is an include hell mess and needs cleaning up. Use cpuid_count() from arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c by exporting it properly and add the other defines here instead of using kernel proper facilities. I know, I know, there is other misuse but it has to stop. > +static int __ro_after_init tdx_guest = -1; > + > +static inline bool native_cpuid_has_tdx_guest(void) Why is this function prefixed with "native_"? > +{ > + u32 eax = TDX_CPUID_LEAF_ID, sig[3] = {0}; > + > + if (native_cpuid_eax(0) < TDX_CPUID_LEAF_ID) > + return false; > + > + native_cpuid(&eax, &sig[0], &sig[1], &sig[2]); > + > + return !memcmp("IntelTDX ", sig, 12); > +} > + > +bool early_is_tdx_guest(void) So I guess this is going to be used somewhere, because I don't see it. Or is it going away in favor of prot_guest_has(PR_GUEST_TDX) ? This is the problem with sending new versions of patches as a reply to the old ones in the patchset: I get confused. Why don't you wait until the whole thing has been reviewed and then send a new revision which has all the changes and I can find my way in the context? And with the amount of changes so far, you should probably send a new revision of the initial support set now-ish instead of me reviewing this one 'til the end. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette