[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230605213933.vqkvfo5fzffj5zri@box.shutemov.name>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2023 00:39:33 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
marcelo.cerri@...onical.com, tim.gardner@...onical.com,
khalid.elmously@...onical.com, philip.cox@...onical.com,
aarcange@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv13 9/9] x86/tdx: Add unaccepted memory support
On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 12:18:21PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 6/2/23 07:26, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> >> So this is a change in this version. If tdx_accept_memory() fails,
> >> you'll report unknown platform. Wouldn't it be better to have an error
> >> message that indicates a failure in the accept path?
> >>
> >
> > Maybe you can keep it similar to the v12 version with just a new error
> > message, something like:
> >
> > if (early_is_tdx_guest()) {
> > if (!tdx_accept_memory(start, end))
> > error("TDX error accepting memory\n");
> > } else {
> > error("Cannot accept memory: unknown platform\n");
> > }
>
> In the end, these errors aren't plumbed out to the page allocator. They
> *need* to succeed or we are dead anyway. Should we just send a fatal
> error up to the TDX module when we fail to accept memory? It's
> _slightly_ less opaque than plowing into an unaccepted page.
This is decompressor's error()s which are fatal.
arch_accept_memory() in the main kernel uses panic() in the same spot.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists