[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4f4c7f4085cffd63c2548ef6dbaa7857e8bbbc89.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 00:45:49 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com" <isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"n.borisov.lkml@...il.com" <n.borisov.lkml@...il.com>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] Unify TDCALL/SEAMCALL and TDVMCALL assembly
On Wed, 2023-09-13 at 17:22 -0700, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 11:01:28PM +0000,
> "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2023-08-15 at 23:01 +1200, Kai Huang wrote:
> > > Hi Peter, Kirill,
> > >
> > > This series unifies the assembly code for TDCALL/SEAMCALL and TDVMCALL.
> > > Now all of them use one singe TDX_MODULE_CALL asm macro. More
> > > information please see cover letter of v2 (see link below).
> > >
> > > Tested by booting TDX guest, initializing TDX module, and running TDX
> > > guest successfully, all with this series applied.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Sorry to ping, but could you take a look whether you are OK with this series?
> >
> > Basically Kirill has provided his Reviewed-by for all the patches except the
> > last one (Add unused registers to 'struct tdx_module_args' to optimize VP.ENTER
> > for KVM), which he didn't like. But it is pretty much a standalone optimization
> > patch we either can have or drop when applying, so I'll leave to you.
> >
> > Also feel free to let me know if I can help you on anything to offload part of
> > your load? :-)
>
> Because the optimization patch was dropped in tip x86/tdx tree, TDX KVM can't
> use __seamcall_saved_ret() because the argument doesn't match. There is no
> user of __seamcall_saved_ret().
>
I agree sometimes "optimization" is better to have, but functionally we
certainly don't depend on "optimization" to work, so sure KVM TDX can use it (of
course I will leave to maintainers though).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists