[PATCH v5 31/32] x86: Add sysfs support for Secure Memory Encryption
thomas.lendacky at amd.com
Thu May 4 07:17:48 PDT 2017
On 4/27/2017 10:52 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 04/27/2017 12:25 AM, Dave Young wrote:
>> On 04/21/17 at 02:55pm, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> On 04/18/2017 02:22 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>>> Add sysfs support for SME so that user-space utilities (kdump, etc.) can
>>>> determine if SME is active.
>>>> A new directory will be created:
>>>> And two entries within the new directory:
>>> Why do they care, and what will they be doing with this information?
>> Since kdump will copy old memory but need this to know if the old memory
>> was encrypted or not. With this sysfs file we can know the previous SME
>> status and pass to kdump kernel as like a kernel param.
>> Tom, have you got chance to try if it works or not?
> What will the kdump kernel do with it though? We kexec() into that
> kernel so the SME keys will all be the same, right? So, will the kdump
Yes, the SME key will be same after a kexec.
> kernel be just setting the encryption bit in the PTE so it can copy the
> old plaintext out?
Yes, the idea would be to set the encryption bit in the PTE when mapping
and copying encrypted pages and not set it for unencrypted pages.
> Why do we need both 'active' and 'encryption_mask'? How could it be
> that the hardware-enumerated 'encryption_mask' changes across a kexec()?
We don't need both, I just added the 'encryption mask' entry for
information. It won't change across a kexec, I can remove it.
More information about the kexec