[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+noqoh90h3Mtk_3++bnMGMYyEGmUUq09R1k2WzCUbKX1jgQXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 12:32:27 -0700
From: Abhishek Bhardwaj <abhishekbh@...gle.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>,
Anthony Steinhauser <asteinhauser@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Mark Gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/speculation/l1tf: Add KConfig for setting the L1D
cache flush mode
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 8:14 AM Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/5/20 5:51 PM, Abhishek Bhardwaj wrote:
>
> That is why I said a comment will have to be added to highlight this
> dependency. For instance,
>
> +/*
> + * Three of the enums are explicitly assigned as the KVM_VMENTRY_L1D_FLUSH
> + * config entry in arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig depends on these values.
> + */
> enum vmx_l1d_flush_state {
> VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_AUTO,
> - VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_NEVER,
> - VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_COND,
> - VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_ALWAYS,
> + VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_NEVER = 1,
> + VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_COND = 2,
> + VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_ALWAYS = 3,
> VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_EPT_DISABLED,
> VMENTER_L1D_FLUSH_NOT_REQUIRED,
> };
>
> Of course, this is just a suggestion.
>
> I'd rather avoid this dependency. However, if people are okay with the
> CONFIG option then I am happy to oblige with whatever people agree on.
> Can a maintainer chime in ? Waiman if you're the final authority on
> this, will you accept the patch if I incorporated your suggestion ?
>
> It is fine if you think this is not what you want.
>
> BTW, I am not a maintainer. However, no maintainer will give pre-approval. At least, you have to give the reason why this patch is needed in the patch itself. Before that happens, I don't see how it will get merged upstream.
I just updated the patch with the reasoning in the commit message -
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/7/8/1325
>
> Cheers,
> Longman
--
Abhishek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists