search for: set_page_encrypted

...les changed, 39 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/ident_map_64.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/ident_map_64.c index bb68e9c9d87a..d3771d455249 100644 --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/ident_map_64.c +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/ident_map_64.c @@ -291,10 +291,21 @@ int set_page_encrypted(unsigned long address) return set_clr_page_flags(&mapping_info, address, _PAGE_ENC, 0); } +int set_page_non_present(unsigned long address) +{ + return set_clr_page_flags(&mapping_info, address, 0, _PAGE_PRESENT); +} + void do_boot_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_c...

...e, set); + pte = pte_clear_flags(pte, clr); + set_pte(ptep, pte); + + /* Flush TLB after changing encryption attribute */ + write_cr3(top_level_pgt); + + return 0; +} + +int set_page_decrypted(unsigned long address) +{ + return set_clr_page_flags(&mapping_info, address, 0, _PAGE_ENC); +} + +int set_page_encrypted(unsigned long address) +{ + return set_clr_page_flags(&mapping_info, address, _PAGE_ENC, 0); +} + void do_boot_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code) { unsigned long address = native_read_cr2() & PMD_MASK; diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.h b/arch/x86/boot/...

...v_es_shutdown_ghcb(void) > +{ > + if (!boot_ghcb) > + return; > + > + /* > + * GHCB Page must be flushed from the cache and mapped encrypted again. > + * Otherwise the running kernel will see strange cache effects when > + * trying to use that page. > + */ > + if (set_page_encrypted((unsigned long)&boot_ghcb_page)) > + error("Can't map GHCB page encrypted"); Is that error() call enough? Shouldn't we BUG_ON() here or mark that page Reserved or so, so that nothing uses it during the system lifetime and thus avoid the strange cache effects? ... >...

...v_es_shutdown_ghcb(void) > +{ > + if (!boot_ghcb) > + return; > + > + /* > + * GHCB Page must be flushed from the cache and mapped encrypted again. > + * Otherwise the running kernel will see strange cache effects when > + * trying to use that page. > + */ > + if (set_page_encrypted((unsigned long)&boot_ghcb_page)) > + error("Can't map GHCB page encrypted"); Is that error() call enough? Shouldn't we BUG_ON() here or mark that page Reserved or so, so that nothing uses it during the system lifetime and thus avoid the strange cache effects? ... >...

...cally belong in this function AFAICT as this > function should setup the GHCB only. You can move it to the caller. Probably better rename the function, it also does the sev-es protocol version negotiation and all other related setup tasks. Maybe sev_es_setup() is a better name? > > + if (set_page_encrypted((unsigned long)&boot_ghcb_page)) > > + error("Can't map GHCB page encrypted"); > > Is that error() call enough? > > Shouldn't we BUG_ON() here or mark that page Reserved or so, so that > nothing uses it during the system lifetime and thus avoid the stra...

...dom_location(unsigned long input, unsigned long input_size, @@ -97,6 +95,9 @@ static inline void choose_random_location(unsigned long input, } #endif +/* cpuflags.c */ +bool has_cpuflag(int flag); + #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 extern int set_page_decrypted(unsigned long address); extern int set_page_encrypted(unsigned long address); diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/sev-es.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/sev-es.c index b522c18c0588..eb1a8b5cc753 100644 --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/sev-es.c +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/sev-es.c @@ -145,6 +145,9 @@ void sev_es_shutdown_ghcb(void) if (!boot_ghcb)...

...inat_init_tables(); + + return true; +} + +void sev_es_shutdown_ghcb(void) +{ + if (!boot_ghcb) + return; + + /* + * GHCB Page must be flushed from the cache and mapped encrypted again. + * Otherwise the running kernel will see strange cache effects when + * trying to use that page. + */ + if (set_page_encrypted((unsigned long)&boot_ghcb_page)) + error("Can't map GHCB page encrypted"); +} + +void do_boot_stage2_vc(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long exit_code) +{ + struct es_em_ctxt ctxt; + enum es_result result; + + if (!boot_ghcb && !sev_es_setup_ghcb()) + sev_es_terminate(GHC...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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