lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/4] drm/ttm, drm/vmwgfx: Correctly support support AMD memory encryption
From
Date
On 9/3/19 1:36 PM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
> So the question here should really be, can we determine already at mmap
> time whether backing memory will be unencrypted and adjust the *real*
> vma->vm_page_prot under the mmap_sem?
>
> Possibly, but that requires populating the buffer with memory at mmap
> time rather than at first fault time.

I'm not connecting the dots.

vma->vm_page_prot is used to create a VMA's PTEs regardless of if they
are created at mmap() or fault time. If we establish a good
vma->vm_page_prot, can't we just use it forever for demand faults?

Or, are you concerned that if an attempt is made to demand-fault page
that's incompatible with vma->vm_page_prot that we have to SEGV?

> And it still requires knowledge whether the device DMA is always
> unencrypted (or if SEV is active).

I may be getting mixed up on MKTME (the Intel memory encryption) and
SEV. Is SEV supported on all memory types? Page cache, hugetlbfs,
anonymous? Or just anonymous?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-03 22:52    [W:0.076 / U:35.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site