[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230619162703.GRZJCB10+Xg8fn8XLx@fat_crate.local>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2023 18:27:03 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
jroedel@...e.de, thomas.lendacky@....com, hpa@...or.com,
ardb@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, jmattson@...gle.com, luto@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, slp@...hat.com, pgonda@...gle.com,
peterz@...radead.org, srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com, tobin@....com,
vbabka@...e.cz, kirill@...temov.name, ak@...ux.intel.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, marcorr@...gle.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, alpergun@...gle.com,
dgilbert@...hat.com, jarkko@...nel.org, ashish.kalra@....com,
nikunj.dadhania@....com, liam.merwick@...cle.com,
zhi.a.wang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v9 04/51] KVM: x86: Determine shared/private faults
using a configurable mask
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 11:25:12PM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> This will be used to determine whether or not an #NPF should be serviced
> using a normal page vs. a guarded/gmem one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 7 +++++++
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index b3bd24f2a390..c26f76641121 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1445,6 +1445,13 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> */
> #define SPLIT_DESC_CACHE_MIN_NR_OBJECTS (SPTE_ENT_PER_PAGE + 1)
> struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_desc_cache;
> +
> + /*
> + * When set, used to determine whether a fault should be treated as
^^^^^^^^
And when not set? Invalid?
I guess so, judging by the code below.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists