linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/8] KVM: x86: extend struct kvm_vcpu_pv_apf

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 09:33:13 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc:     Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] KVM: x86: extend struct kvm_vcpu_pv_apf_data with
 token info

On 21/05/20 16:59, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> However, interrupts for 'page ready' do have a bunch of advantages (more
>> control on what can be preempted by the notification, a saner check for
>> new page faults which is effectively a bug fix) so it makes sense to get
>> them in more quickly (probably 5.9 at this point due to the massive
>> cleanups that are being done around interrupt vectors).
>>
> Actually, I have almost no feedback to address in v2 :-) Almost all
> discussion are happening around #VE. Don't mean to rush or anything but
> if the 'cleanups' are finalized I can hopefully rebase and retest very
> quickly as it's only the KVM guest part which intersects with them, the
> rest should be KVM-only. But 5.9 is good too)

Yeah, going for 5.9 would only be due to the conflicts.  Do send v2
anyway now, so that we can use a merge commit to convert the interrupt
vector to the 5.8 style.

Paolo