[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230628135436.GC2439977@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 15:54:36 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...el.com,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, david@...hat.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
ashok.raj@...el.com, reinette.chatre@...el.com,
len.brown@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, isaku.yamahata@...el.com,
ying.huang@...el.com, chao.gao@...el.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, nik.borisov@...e.com,
bagasdotme@...il.com, sagis@...gle.com, imammedo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 05/22] x86/virt/tdx: Add SEAMCALL infrastructure
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 02:58:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Can someone explain to me why __tdx_hypercall() is sane (per the above)
> but then we grew __tdx_module_call() as an absolute abomination and are
> apparently using that for seam too?
That is, why do we have two different TDCALL wrappers? Makes no sense.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists