Displaying 14 results from an estimated 14 matches for "ghcb_activ".
Did you mean:
ghcb_active
2020 Apr 28
0
[PATCH v3 47/75] x86/sev-es: Add Runtime #VC Exception Handler
.../* Reserve on page per CPU as backup storage for the unencrypted GHCB */
+ struct ghcb backup_ghcb;
+
+ /*
+ * Mark the per-cpu GHCBs as in-use to detect nested #VC exceptions.
+ * There is no need for it to be atomic, because nothing is written to
+ * the GHCB between the read and the write of ghcb_active. So it is safe
+ * to use it when a nested #VC exception happens before the write.
+ */
+ bool ghcb_active;
+ bool backup_ghcb_active;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sev_es_runtime_data*, runtime_data);
+struct ghcb_state {
+ struct ghcb *ghcb;
+};
+
/*
* Shift/Unshift the IST entry fo...
2020 May 23
4
[PATCH v3 47/75] x86/sev-es: Add Runtime #VC Exception Handler
...t ghcb backup_ghcb;
I could use some text explaining what those backups are for?
> + /*
> + * Mark the per-cpu GHCBs as in-use to detect nested #VC exceptions.
> + * There is no need for it to be atomic, because nothing is written to
> + * the GHCB between the read and the write of ghcb_active. So it is safe
> + * to use it when a nested #VC exception happens before the write.
> + */
Looks liks that is that text... support for nested #VC exceptions.
I'm sure this has come up already but why do we even want to support
nested #VCs? IOW, can we do without them first or are the...
2020 May 23
4
[PATCH v3 47/75] x86/sev-es: Add Runtime #VC Exception Handler
...t ghcb backup_ghcb;
I could use some text explaining what those backups are for?
> + /*
> + * Mark the per-cpu GHCBs as in-use to detect nested #VC exceptions.
> + * There is no need for it to be atomic, because nothing is written to
> + * the GHCB between the read and the write of ghcb_active. So it is safe
> + * to use it when a nested #VC exception happens before the write.
> + */
Looks liks that is that text... support for nested #VC exceptions.
I'm sure this has come up already but why do we even want to support
nested #VCs? IOW, can we do without them first or are the...
2020 Jun 11
0
[PATCH v3 47/75] x86/sev-es: Add Runtime #VC Exception Handler
...On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 05:16:57PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Mark the per-cpu GHCBs as in-use to detect nested #VC exceptions.
> > + * There is no need for it to be atomic, because nothing is written to
> > + * the GHCB between the read and the write of ghcb_active. So it is safe
> > + * to use it when a nested #VC exception happens before the write.
> > + */
>
> Looks liks that is that text... support for nested #VC exceptions.
> I'm sure this has come up already but why do we even want to support
> nested #VCs? IOW, can we do...
2020 Jun 11
1
[PATCH v3 47/75] x86/sev-es: Add Runtime #VC Exception Handler
...0 at 05:16:57PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > + * Mark the per-cpu GHCBs as in-use to detect nested #VC exceptions.
> > > + * There is no need for it to be atomic, because nothing is written to
> > > + * the GHCB between the read and the write of ghcb_active. So it is safe
> > > + * to use it when a nested #VC exception happens before the write.
> > > + */
> >
> > Looks liks that is that text... support for nested #VC exceptions.
> > I'm sure this has come up already but why do we even want to support
> &g...
2020 Apr 28
0
[PATCH v3 54/75] x86/sev-es: Handle DR7 read/write events
...e <asm/traps.h>
#include <asm/svm.h>
+#define DR7_RESET_VALUE 0x400
+
/* For early boot hypervisor communication in SEV-ES enabled guests */
static struct ghcb boot_ghcb_page __bss_decrypted __aligned(PAGE_SIZE);
@@ -61,6 +63,13 @@ struct sev_es_runtime_data {
*/
bool ghcb_active;
bool backup_ghcb_active;
+
+ /*
+ * Cached DR7 value - write it on DR7 writes and return it on reads.
+ * That value will never make it to the real hardware DR7 as debugging
+ * is currently unsupported in SEV-ES guests.
+ */
+ unsigned long dr7;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sev_es_r...
2020 Jul 24
86
[PATCH v5 00/75] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is a rebased version of the latest SEV-ES patches. They are now
based on latest tip/master instead of upstream Linux and include the
necessary changes.
Changes to v4 are in particular:
- Moved early IDT setup code to idt.c, because the idt_descr
and the idt_table are now static
- This required to make stack protector work early (or
2020 Jul 14
92
[PATCH v4 00/75] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is the fourth version of the SEV-ES Guest Support patches. I
addressed the review comments sent to me for the previous version and
rebased the code v5.8-rc5.
The biggest change in this version is the IST handling code for the
#VC handler. I adapted the entry code for the #VC handler to the big
pile of entry code changes merged into
2020 Jul 14
92
[PATCH v4 00/75] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is the fourth version of the SEV-ES Guest Support patches. I
addressed the review comments sent to me for the previous version and
rebased the code v5.8-rc5.
The biggest change in this version is the IST handling code for the
#VC handler. I adapted the entry code for the #VC handler to the big
pile of entry code changes merged into
2020 Aug 24
96
[PATCH v6 00/76] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is the new version of the SEV-ES client enabling patch-set. It is
based on the latest tip/master branch and contains the necessary
changes. In particular those ar:
- Enabling CR4.FSGSBASE early on supported processors so that
early #VC exceptions on APs can be handled.
- Add another patch (patch 1) to fix a KVM frame-size build
2020 Sep 07
84
[PATCH v7 00/72] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is a new version of the SEV-ES Guest Support patches for x86. The
previous versions can be found as a linked list starting here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200824085511.7553-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
I updated the patch-set based on ther review comments I got and the
discussions around it.
Another important change is that the early IDT
2020 Sep 07
84
[PATCH v7 00/72] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de>
Hi,
here is a new version of the SEV-ES Guest Support patches for x86. The
previous versions can be found as a linked list starting here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200824085511.7553-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
I updated the patch-set based on ther review comments I got and the
discussions around it.
Another important change is that the early IDT
2020 Apr 28
116
[PATCH v3 00/75] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
Hi,
here is the next version of changes to enable Linux to run as an SEV-ES
guest. The code was rebased to v5.7-rc3 and got a fair number of changes
since the last version.
What is SEV-ES
==============
SEV-ES is an acronym for 'Secure Encrypted Virtualization - Encrypted
State' and means a hardware feature of AMD processors which hides the
register state of VCPUs to the hypervisor by
2020 Apr 28
116
[PATCH v3 00/75] x86: SEV-ES Guest Support
Hi,
here is the next version of changes to enable Linux to run as an SEV-ES
guest. The code was rebased to v5.7-rc3 and got a fair number of changes
since the last version.
What is SEV-ES
==============
SEV-ES is an acronym for 'Secure Encrypted Virtualization - Encrypted
State' and means a hardware feature of AMD processors which hides the
register state of VCPUs to the hypervisor by