[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32da2d11-6270-1484-6f28-4e50e58c568a@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:34:33 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter H Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/tdx: Add tdg_debug_enabled() interface
On 7/19/21 9:33 PM, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> Add a new interface to detect the TDX debug mode. This will be used by
> follow-on patches. Examples of its usage are, when adding command line
> debug options to disable TDX features like driver or port filter,
> tdg_debug_enabled() is used to make sure it is used only in debug
> mode.
This patch must be dropped from this series. There is no user for this
code. Please introduce these in the series where they are used.
We don't know whether this is a good implementation or not without
seeing the users. For instance, should this be an X86_FEATURE?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists