Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 18 Jun 2021 07:46:38 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Sergio Lopez <slp@redhat.com>, Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, tony.luck@intel.com,
        npmccallum@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Part1 RFC v3 06/22] x86/sev: check SEV-SNP features
 support
Message-ID: <YMwzPjV9s/6qW75m@zn.tnic>
References: <20210602140416.23573-1-brijesh.singh@amd.com>
 <20210602140416.23573-7-brijesh.singh@amd.com>
 <YL4zJT1v6OuH+tvI@zn.tnic>
 <e617a0a1-bb8d-9d75-56a4-2ac1138ebf8b@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e617a0a1-bb8d-9d75-56a4-2ac1138ebf8b@amd.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 01:46:08PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Based on your feedback on AP creation patch to not use the accessors, I am inclined to
> remove this helper and have the caller directly check the feature bit, is that okay ?
> 
> something like:
> 
> if (sev_snp_enabled() && !(hv_features & GHCB_HV_FT_SNP))
> 	sev_es_terminate(GHCB_SNP_UNSUPPORTED);
> 
> Let me know if you think I should still keep the accessors.

Yeah, looks about right. Let's keep hv_features in a sev-specific
header so that there are no name clashes. Or maybe we should call it
sev_hv_features since it is going to be read-only anyway.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette