On 10/2/2017 8:51 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 08:44:21AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
I think we're talking about the same thing. You want sev_enabled to
indicate whether you can launch an SEV guest. We would still need an
sev_active variable to distinguish between SME and SEV during kernel
execution when the sme_me_mask is non-zero. Currently, the SEV feature
bit acts as "sev_enabled" and the sev_enabled variable acts as
"sev_active" in this scenario.
See my last email about sev_host_enabled. Does that sound better?
Hmmm... strange, I haven't received that email or that part of the thread
for that matter - including Brijesh's reply. I'll talk with Brijesh and
let him run with it.
Thanks,
Tom
