From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.12]) (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 3D4761758D for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 11:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708688568; cv=none; b=iR0WPv9N2uACfERykryniKluR5dk7E+3iglf8LwFkwJ/o2jQHBs5KU05hhKYMRWzvaMEVzE3BNe34D6D/MzL/IsHadDs+Np2bYjrojmn780J8cSnpe3ra+GZheC8mX4Xf42XAeDD88Wjr5uuINYZF/bA2FoUqpOueDtfOlJzgAk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708688568; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vdBaLCWVdyZ71ZZvVpVhOOJKh3hy3RP5Mn3l/HmMOeE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HYwL+PWaDyZu4h8R4V5gEeV3mgTs5hkRoe9VfsqMmxO2FhND4xT3C5sD03uGSzlXsoD+LWyDJBMsLqMkjJkZ/oMDCXIka0N5MkqsbEwKKFXmYzcKECJQJJ/QcYRh/AbRXdWLJoGCYLwmAbHBEBdYDyaqRJ5PS8qjRNgerTwaBFo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=LUIqoF4d; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="LUIqoF4d" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1708688567; x=1740224567; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=vdBaLCWVdyZ71ZZvVpVhOOJKh3hy3RP5Mn3l/HmMOeE=; b=LUIqoF4dTX9FpaeS5+xx0/2nesPUGNqrObi0OCggM9RqIBIHNj6jki7p EJLs9N9lDzxrxZ2A6UDFhVRt9djtntokwePQ2dwzTjwdjzX7enjCVD3cX 2CAHBQTHbqJos/S5ROugV2yl8WD3epjfo04yV1ooAl4O1YEyWm6lCk1LH 2LsfC6hDzK3riUXM5+bkl2wvq5dFVl2isCo6Gc/FnL0tISwIthcN19FyG Qt0aMGt1VuSUr5pM8qqWKIGMTQlG5SCpc1Gn13Io/gybvelsWgAsogSNJ lE8DG6BLez9NoH/OOyhg8rMxK8j5h8iAAJOjYal6eNDIDy7AM3552tNHW Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10992"; a="6784593" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,179,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="6784593" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmvoesa106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Feb 2024 03:41:05 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10992"; a="937024666" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,179,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="937024666" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2024 03:41:03 -0800 Received: by black.fi.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A491734C; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 13:41:01 +0200 (EET) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 13:41:01 +0200 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Dave Hansen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, bp@alien8.de Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 12/34] x86/cpu/intel: Actually use "address configuration" infrastructure for MKTME Message-ID: References: <20240222183926.517AFCD2@davehans-spike.ostc.intel.com> <20240222183942.601EE2E5@davehans-spike.ostc.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240222183942.601EE2E5@davehans-spike.ostc.intel.com> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:39:42AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > From: Dave Hansen > > Now that the TME detection is only called once at boot, stop twiddling > 'boot_cpu_data' directly and move over to 'bsp_addr_config'. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen > --- > > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 7 ++----- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c~intel-addr-reduce arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c~intel-addr-reduce 2024-02-22 10:08:54.296682462 -0800 > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c 2024-02-22 10:08:54.296682462 -0800 > @@ -401,11 +401,8 @@ detect_keyid_bits: > mktme_status = MKTME_ENABLED; > } > > - /* > - * KeyID bits effectively lower the number of physical address > - * bits. Update cpuinfo_x86::x86_phys_bits accordingly. > - */ > - c->x86_phys_bits -= keyid_bits; > + /* KeyID bits effectively lower the number of physical address bits */ > + bsp_addr_config.phys_addr_reduction_bits = keyid_bits; Do we expect reduction_bits to stack? Like can multiple features steal physical bits? Make use "+= keyid_bits" here? -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov