On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 11:49:59AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > What would have helped is if the secure-erase and unlock definition in > the specification mandated that the device emit cache invalidations for > everything it has mapped when it is erased. However, that has some > holes, and it also makes me think there is a gap in the current region > provisioning code. If I have device-A mapped at physical-address-X and then > tear that down and instantiate device-B at that same physical address > there needs to be CPU cache invalidation between those 2 events. Can we pretty please get those holes fixed ASAP such that future generations can avoid the WBINVD nonsense?
