Re: [PATCH 00/10] Handle set_memory_XXcrypted() errors

[Dave Hansen]

On 10/23/23 09:47, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> For paranoid CoCo VM users, using panic_on_warn=1 seems workable.
> However, with current code and this patch series, it's possible have
> set_memory_decrypted() return an error and have set_memory_encrypted()
> fix things up as best it can without generating any warnings. It seems
> like we need a WARN or some equivalent mechanism if either of these
> fails, so that CoCo VMs can panic if they don't want to run with any
> inconsistencies (again, assuming the host isn't malicious).

Adding a warning to the fixup path in set_memory_encrypted() would be
totally fine with me.