From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5758D2F23 for ; Fri, 13 May 2022 14:45:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1652453124; x=1683989124; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=oe4RvQVrbAkDL0kypbBx+ih7yeuE1vnJ1rTohZdq0BI=; b=aeIK4GQyl51l9WEglCrUXCqlgKyawavRKr1XeSU3LUbnfmqOx0QnJHzA KNQ9Jx9KoAEm0Nu7aCMCs7Pw85YpTPshzqbLE8zFAFgTE9omsFhPDMtXM rRunCiYkGQ5IUOOk+ywPQJjmFpHay/yoC2f7+hT0MnSBDaEmawz3N+R49 enkUsxac8a9osGJbhVWycOqS4Y8wjrY1EVobtyu+kJCwcylB0dOtwcW7s ZQEPurG0EJ9hqW5hel6JmS/Zatn1GqnWMKpOJQC6Zltiz1kWGgDL56x0K 1eZizkGAiHyqnRz5C0BqqyV+XN/XKMol38cixySgKtiBcz/Ofgp+T0tnh A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10346"; a="269990343" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,223,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="269990343" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2022 07:45:23 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,223,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="603862328" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2022 07:45:15 -0700 Received: by black.fi.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FF2D147; Fri, 13 May 2022 17:45:15 +0300 (EEST) Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:45:15 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Borislav Petkov , Min Xu , Jiaqi Gao Cc: Dionna Amalie Glaze , Michael Roth , Borislav Petkov , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andy Lutomirski , Sean Christopherson , Andrew Morton , Joerg Roedel , Ard Biesheuvel , Andi Kleen , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , David Rientjes , Vlastimil Babka , Tom Lendacky , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Paolo Bonzini , Ingo Molnar , Varad Gautam , Dario Faggioli , Dave Hansen , Mike Rapoport , David Hildenbrand , x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 06/12] x86/boot/compressed: Handle unaccepted memory Message-ID: <20220513144515.fx2cvo3rjued3vy5@black.fi.intel.com> References: <20220425033934.68551-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20220425033934.68551-7-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20220506153013.e6v4q2qhuhqumfiu@box.shutemov.name> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 11:01:43AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > + mroth > - brijesh > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:34:02PM -0700, Dionna Amalie Glaze wrote: > > Kirill, I've been tracking these changes to see if we can handle the > > unaccepted memory type for SEV-SNP, but testing has been an issue. The > > proposed patch in Ovmf to introduce unaccepted memory seems to have > > stalled out last September > > (https://www.mail-archive.com/devel@edk2.groups.io/msg35842.html) and > > is particularly difficult to adapt to SEV-SNP since it doesn't follow > > the TDVF way of initializing all memory. Is there a different > > development I might have missed so that we might test these cases? > > Without the UEFI introducing EFI_UNACCEPTED_MEMORY type, any kernel > > uses are essentially dead code. + Min, Jiaqi. I don't follow firmware development. Min, Jiaqi, could you comment? -- Kirill A. Shutemov