Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Nov 2022 10:30:23 -0800 | Subject | Re: [Patch v3 07/14] x86/hyperv: Change vTOM handling to use standard coco mechanisms | From | Dave Hansen <> |
| |
On 11/22/22 10:22, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote: > Anyway, that's where I think this should go. Does it make sense? > Other thoughts?
I think hard-coding the C-bit behavior and/or position to a vendor was probably a bad idea. Even the comment:
u64 cc_mkenc(u64 val) { /* * Both AMD and Intel use a bit in the page table to indicate * encryption status of the page. * * - for AMD, bit *set* means the page is encrypted * - for Intel *clear* means encrypted. */
doesn't make a lot of sense now. Maybe we should just have a:
CC_ATTR_ENC_SET
which gets set for the "AMD" behavior and is clear for the "Intel" behavior. Hyper-V code running on AMD can set the attribute to get teh "Intel" behavior.
That sure beats having a Hyper-V vendor.
| |