Re: [PATCHv3 02/32] x86/coco: Add API to handle encryption mask

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 02:03:12PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> I would rather make cc_mkenc()/cc_mkdec() to operate on u64 (or
> phys_addr_t?) while pgprot_encrypted()/pgprot_decrypted() cover pgprot_t.
> It also makes set_memory cleaner:
> 
> 	cpa.mask_set = __pgprot(enc ? cc_mkenc(0) : cc_mkdec(0));
> 	cpa.mask_clr = __pgprot(enc ? cc_mkdec(0) : cc_mkenc(0));
> 
> Opinions?

Right, do I see it correctly that the cc_mk{enc,dec}() things should
take a u64 as an argument and return a pgprot_t, and that would be the
most optimal way for all the use cases?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette