Re: [RFC PATCH v2 08/32] x86: Use PAGE_KERNEL protection for ioremap of memory page

2017-03-17 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/17/2017 9:32 AM, Tom Lendacky wrote: On 3/16/2017 3:04 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: On 3/7/2017 8:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:13:32AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky In order for memory pages to be properly mapped when SEV is active, we need to

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 08/32] x86: Use PAGE_KERNEL protection for ioremap of memory page

2017-03-17 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/16/2017 3:04 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: On 3/7/2017 8:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:13:32AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky In order for memory pages to be properly mapped when SEV is active, we need to use the PAGE_KERNEL protection attribute as

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 08/32] x86: Use PAGE_KERNEL protection for ioremap of memory page

2017-03-16 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/7/2017 8:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:13:32AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky In order for memory pages to be properly mapped when SEV is active, we need to use the PAGE_KERNEL protection attribute as the base protection. This will insure that

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 05/32] x86: Use encrypted access of BOOT related data with SEV

2017-03-16 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/7/2017 5:09 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:12:59AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky When Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) is active, BOOT data (such as EFI related data, setup data) is encrypted and needs to be accessed as such when mapped

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/32] x86: Add early boot support when running with SEV active

2017-03-16 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/16/2017 10:09 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:28:58AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: Because there are differences between how SME and SEV behave (instruction fetches are always decrypted under SEV, DMA to an encrypted location is not supported under SEV, etc.) we need to

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/32] x86: Add early boot support when running with SEV active

2017-03-16 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/16/2017 5:16 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:35:30AM -0600, Brijesh Singh wrote: We could update this patch to use the below logic: * CPUID(0) - Check for AuthenticAMD * CPID(1) - Check if under hypervisor * CPUID(0x8000) - Check for highest supported leaf * C

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/32] x86/pci: Use memremap when walking setup data

2017-03-13 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/6/2017 6:03 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 03:15:34PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: On 3/3/2017 2:42 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:13:10AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky The use of ioremap will force the setup data to be mapped

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/32] x86/pci: Use memremap when walking setup data

2017-03-03 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 3/3/2017 2:42 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:13:10AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: From: Tom Lendacky The use of ioremap will force the setup data to be mapped decrypted even though setup data is encrypted. Switch to using memremap which will be able to perform the

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 09/28] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active

2016-09-22 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 09/22/2016 02:11 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:04:27PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: >> That's not what I mean here. If the BIOS sets the SMEE bit in the >> SYS_CFG msr then, even if the encryption bit is never used, there is >> still a red

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 09/28] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active

2016-09-22 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 09/22/2016 09:45 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 22/09/2016 16:35, Borislav Petkov wrote: @@ -230,6 +230,10 @@ int __init efi_setup_page_tables(unsigned long pa_memmap, unsigned num_pages) efi_scratch.efi_pgt = (pgd_t *)__sme_pa(efi_pgd); pgd = efi_pgd;

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 09/28] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active

2016-09-22 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 09/22/2016 09:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:45:51PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> The main difference between the SME and SEV encryption, from the point >> of view of the kernel, is that real-mode always writes unencrypted in >> SME and always writes encrypted in SE

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 09/28] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active

2016-09-22 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 09/22/2016 12:07 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 05:05:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Which paragraph? > > "Linux relies on BIOS to set this bit if BIOS has determined that the > reduction in the physical address space as a result of enabling memory > encryption..." >

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 09/28] x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted when SEV is active

2016-09-22 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 09/22/2016 09:35 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 07:25:25PM -0400, Brijesh Singh wrote: >> From: Tom Lendacky >> >> EFI data is encrypted when the kernel is run under SEV. Update the >> page table references to be sure the EFI memory area

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 18/28] crypto: add AMD Platform Security Processor driver

2016-08-24 Thread Tom Lendacky
erface for SEV guests. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky >> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh > > This driver doesn't seem to hook into the Crypto API at all, is > there any reason why it should be in drivers/crypto? Yes, this needs to be cleaned up. The PSP and the CC