linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/16] KVM: selftests: Add tests for SEV, SEV-ES, and SEV-SNP guests

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <acc619e9-9133-1c12-7dea-4f0aff631cf9@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 09:35:40 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc:     linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Nathan Tempelman <natet@...gle.com>,
        Marc Orr <marcorr@...gle.com>,
        Steve Rutherford <srutherford@...gle.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Varad Gautam <varad.gautam@...e.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@...gle.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/16] KVM: selftests: Add tests for SEV, SEV-ES, and
 SEV-SNP guests

On 25/10/21 06:27, Michael Roth wrote:
> 
> Glad to hear:)  For v2 I'll work on getting SEV/SEV-ES broken out into a
> separate series with all the review comments addressed. Still a little
> unsure about the best way to address some things in patch #3, but
> outlined a tentative plan that hopefully seems reasonable. Can re-visit
> in v2 as well.

Sounds good, all I can do is point out things that seem "weird", but 
nothing beats the experience of actually working with the code.

Paolo