Re: [PATCH v21 08/28] x86/cpu/intel: Detect SGX support and update caps appropriately

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:35:42PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 08:07:44PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 71 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> > index 8d6d92ebeb54..1503b251d10f 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> > @@ -623,6 +623,72 @@ static void detect_tme(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >  	c->x86_phys_bits -= keyid_bits;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void __maybe_unused detect_sgx(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long long fc;
> > +
> > +	rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL, fc);
> > +	if (!(fc & FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED)) {
> > +		pr_err_once("sgx: The feature control MSR is not locked\n");
> > +		goto err_unsupported;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!(fc & FEATURE_CONTROL_SGX_ENABLE)) {
> > +		pr_err_once("sgx: SGX is not enabled in IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL MSR\n");
> > +		goto err_unsupported;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_SGX1)) {
> > +		pr_err_once("sgx: SGX1 instruction set is not supported\n");
> > +		goto err_unsupported;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!(fc & FEATURE_CONTROL_SGX_LE_WR)) {
> > +		pr_info_once("sgx: The launch control MSRs are not writable\n");
> > +		goto err_msrs_rdonly;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return;
> > +
> > +err_unsupported:
> > +	setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX);
> > +	setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX1);
> > +	setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX2);
> > +
> > +err_msrs_rdonly:
> > +	setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX_LC);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void init_intel_energy_perf(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > +{
> > +	u64 epb;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Initialize MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS if not already initialized.
> > +	 * (x86_energy_perf_policy(8) is available to change it at run-time.)
> > +	 */
> > +	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_EPB))
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS, epb);
> > +	if ((epb & 0xF) != ENERGY_PERF_BIAS_PERFORMANCE)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	pr_warn_once("ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: Set to 'normal', was 'performance'\n");
> > +	pr_warn_once("ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: View and update with x86_energy_perf_policy(8)\n");
> > +	epb = (epb & ~0xF) | ENERGY_PERF_BIAS_NORMAL;
> > +	wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS, epb);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void intel_bsp_resume(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > +{
> > +	/*
> > +	 * MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS is lost across suspend/resume,
> > +	 * so reinitialize it properly like during bootup:
> > +	 */
> > +	init_intel_energy_perf(c);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static void init_cpuid_fault(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >  {
> >  	u64 msr;
> > @@ -760,6 +826,11 @@ static void init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >  	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_TME))
> >  		detect_tme(c);
> >  
> > +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_SGX) && cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_SGX))
> > +		detect_sgx(c);
> > +
> > +	init_intel_energy_perf(c);
> 
> All of the energy_perf additions are bogus, looks like a rebase gone wrong.

Thanks for catching this.

/Jarkko