Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/20] x86: Secure Memory Encryption (SME) support

2016-08-31 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 08/30/2016 09:57 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Aug 30, 2016 6:34 AM, "Tom Lendacky" wrote: >> >> On 08/25/2016 08:04 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Tom Lendacky wrote: >>> Provide support for Secure Memory Encryption (SME). This initial

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/20] x86: Secure Memory Encryption (SME) support

2016-08-30 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Aug 30, 2016 6:34 AM, "Tom Lendacky" wrote: > > On 08/25/2016 08:04 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Tom Lendacky wrote: > > > >> Provide support for Secure Memory Encryption (SME). This initial support > >> defines the memory encryption mask as a

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/20] x86: Secure Memory Encryption (SME) support

2016-08-30 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 08/25/2016 08:04 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Tom Lendacky wrote: > >> Provide support for Secure Memory Encryption (SME). This initial support >> defines the memory encryption mask as a variable for quick access and an >> accessor for retrieving the number of physical

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/20] x86: Secure Memory Encryption (SME) support

2016-08-25 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Provide support for Secure Memory Encryption (SME). This initial support > defines the memory encryption mask as a variable for quick access and an > accessor for retrieving the number of physical addressing bits lost if > SME is enabled. What is the