>>
>> PV guests don't go through Linux x86 early boot code. They start at
>> xen_start_kernel() (well, xen-head.S:startup_xen(), really) and merge
>> with baremetal path at x86_64_start_reservations() (for 64-bit).
>>
>
> Ok, I don't think anything needs to be done then. The sme_me_mask is set
>
On 6/9/2017 1:43 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 06/09/2017 02:36 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
On 6/8/2017 5:01 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 08/06/2017 22:17, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 06/08/2017 05:02 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
What may be needed is making s
On 09/06/17 19:43, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 02:36 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>> basis, although (as far as I am aware) Xen as a whole would be able to
>>> encompass itself and all of its PV guests inside one single SME
>>> instance.
>> Yes, that is correct.
Thinking more about this, it
On 06/09/2017 02:36 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> On 6/8/2017 5:01 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 08/06/2017 22:17, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 06/08/2017 05:02 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not se
On 6/8/2017 5:01 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 08/06/2017 22:17, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 06/08/2017 05:02 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not set for PV
guests.
And that may be something that Xen will nee
On 08/06/2017 22:17, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 06/08/2017 05:02 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>> On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not set for PV
> guests.
And that may be something that Xen will need to control through eithe
On 06/08/2017 05:02 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>
>>>
What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not set for PV
guests.
>>>
>>> And that may be something that Xen will need to control through either
>>> CPUID or MSR support for the PV g
On 6/8/2017 3:51 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not set for PV
guests.
And that may be something that Xen will need to control through either
CPUID or MSR support for the PV guests.
Only on newer versions of Xen. On earlier versions (2-3 y
>
>> What may be needed is making sure X86_FEATURE_SME is not set for PV
>> guests.
>
> And that may be something that Xen will need to control through either
> CPUID or MSR support for the PV guests.
Only on newer versions of Xen. On earlier versions (2-3 years old) leaf
0x8007 is passed to
On 6/7/2017 5:06 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 06/07/2017 03:14 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
The cr3 register entry can contain the SME encryption bit that indicates
the PGD is encrypted. The encryption bit should not be used when creating
a virtual address for the PGD table.
Create a new function,
On 06/07/2017 03:14 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> The cr3 register entry can contain the SME encryption bit that indicates
> the PGD is encrypted. The encryption bit should not be used when creating
> a virtual address for the PGD table.
>
> Create a new function, read_cr3_pa(), that will extract the
11 matches
Mail list logo
