On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 09:04:21AM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> I looked at doing that but you get into this cyclical situation unless
> you specifically map each setup data elemement as decrypted. This is ok
> for early_memremap since we have early_memremap_decrypted() but a new
> memremap_decrypted() would have to be added. But I was trying to avoid
> having to do multiple mapping calls inside the current mapping call.
>
> I can always look at converting the setup_data_list from an array
> into a list to eliminate the 32 entry limit, too.
>
> Let me look at adding the early_memremap_decrypted() type support to
> memremap() and see how that looks.
Yes, so this sounds better than the cyclic thing you explained
where you have to add and update since early_memremap() calls into
memremap_should_map_encrypted() which touches the list we're updating at
the same time.
So in the case where you absolutely know that those ranges should
be mapped decrypted, we should have special helpers which do that
explicitly and they are called when we access those special regions.
Well, special for SME. I'm thinking that should simplify the handling
but you'll know better once you write it. :)
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
