[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 04/38] x86/CPU/AMD: Add the Secure Memory Encryption CPU feature
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 7/8/2017 7:50 AM, Brian Gerst wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> Update the CPU features to include identifying and reporting on the >>> Secure Memory Encryption (SME) feature. SME is identified by CPUID >>> 0x8000001f, but requires BIOS support to enable it (set bit 23 of >>> MSR_K8_SYSCFG). Only show the SME feature as available if reported by >>> CPUID and enabled by BIOS. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 + >>> arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h | 2 ++ >>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c | 1 + >>> 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h >>> b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h >>> index 2701e5f..2b692df 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h >>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h >>> @@ -196,6 +196,7 @@ >>> >>> #define X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE ( 7*32+ 8) /* AMD HW-PState */ >>> #define X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK ( 7*32+ 9) /* AMD >>> ProcFeedbackInterface */ >>> +#define X86_FEATURE_SME ( 7*32+10) /* AMD Secure Memory >>> Encryption */ >> >> >> Given that this feature is available only in long mode, this should be >> added to disabled-features.h as disabled for 32-bit builds. > > > I can add that. If the series needs a re-spin then I'll include this > change in the series, otherwise I can send a follow-on patch to handle > the feature for 32-bit builds if that works. > > >> >>> #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PPIN ( 7*32+14) /* Intel Processor Inventory >>> Number */ >>> #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT ( 7*32+15) /* Intel Processor Trace */ >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h >>> b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h >>> index 18b1623..460ac01 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h >>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h >>> @@ -352,6 +352,8 @@ >>> #define MSR_K8_TOP_MEM1 0xc001001a >>> #define MSR_K8_TOP_MEM2 0xc001001d >>> #define MSR_K8_SYSCFG 0xc0010010 >>> +#define MSR_K8_SYSCFG_MEM_ENCRYPT_BIT 23 >>> +#define MSR_K8_SYSCFG_MEM_ENCRYPT >>> BIT_ULL(MSR_K8_SYSCFG_MEM_ENCRYPT_BIT) >>> #define MSR_K8_INT_PENDING_MSG 0xc0010055 >>> /* C1E active bits in int pending message */ >>> #define K8_INTP_C1E_ACTIVE_MASK 0x18000000 >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c >>> index bb5abe8..c47ceee 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c >>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c >>> @@ -611,6 +611,19 @@ static void early_init_amd(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) >>> */ >>> if (cpu_has_amd_erratum(c, amd_erratum_400)) >>> set_cpu_bug(c, X86_BUG_AMD_E400); >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * BIOS support is required for SME. If BIOS has not enabled SME >>> + * then don't advertise the feature (set in scattered.c) >>> + */ >>> + if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_SME)) { >>> + u64 msr; >>> + >>> + /* Check if SME is enabled */ >>> + rdmsrl(MSR_K8_SYSCFG, msr); >>> + if (!(msr & MSR_K8_SYSCFG_MEM_ENCRYPT)) >>> + clear_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_SME); >>> + } >> >> >> This should be conditional on CONFIG_X86_64. > > > If I make the scattered feature support conditional on CONFIG_X86_64 > (based on comment below) then cpu_has() will always be false unless > CONFIG_X86_64 is enabled. So this won't need to be wrapped by the > #ifdef. If you change it to use cpu_feature_enabled(), gcc will see that it is disabled and eliminate the dead code at compile time. >> >>> } >>> >>> static void init_amd_k8(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c >>> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c >>> index 23c2350..05459ad 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c >>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c >>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct cpuid_bit { >>> { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE, CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 }, >>> { X86_FEATURE_CPB, CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 }, >>> { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK, CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x80000007, 0 }, >>> + { X86_FEATURE_SME, CPUID_EAX, 0, 0x8000001f, 0 }, >> >> >> This should also be conditional. We don't want to set this feature on >> 32-bit, even if the processor has support. > > > Can do. See comment above about re-spin vs. follow-on patch. > > Thanks, > Tom A followup patch will be OK if there is no code that will get confused by the SME bit being present but not active. -- Brian Gerst _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |