linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 01/32] x86/paravirt: Introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT

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:   Mon, 10 May 2021 10:07:53 +0200
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/32] x86/paravirt: Introduce CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XL

On 27.04.21 19:31, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> + Jürgen.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:01:28AM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> Split off halt paravirt calls from CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL into
>> a separate config option. It provides a middle ground for
>> not-so-deep paravirtulized environments.
> 
> Please introduce a spellchecker into your patch creation workflow.
> 
> Also, what does "not-so-deep" mean?
> 
>> CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XL will be used by TDX that needs couple of paravirt
>> calls that were hidden under CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL, but the rest of the
>> config would be a bloat for TDX.
> 
> Used how? Why is it bloat for TDX?

Is there any major downside to move the halt related pvops functions
from CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL to CONFIG_PARAVIRT?

I'd rather introduce a new PARAVIRT level only in case of multiple
pvops functions needed for a new guest type, or if a real hot path
would be affected.


Juergen

Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3092 bytes)

Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (496 bytes)