linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH V3 00/26] vfio/pci: Back guest interrupts from Interrupt Message Store (IMS)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <BL1PR11MB52710EAB683507AD7FAD6A5B8CA0A@BL1PR11MB5271.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2023 07:31:24 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To:     "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
        "jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "yishaih@...dia.com" <yishaih@...dia.com>,
        "shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com" 
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
        "alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
CC:     "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "Liu, Jing2" <jing2.liu@...el.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com" <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH V3 00/26] vfio/pci: Back guest interrupts from
 Interrupt Message Store (IMS)

> From: Chatre, Reinette <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2023 1:01 AM
> 
> Changes since RFC V2:
> - RFC V2:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1696609476.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com
> /
> - Still submiting this as RFC series. I believe that this now matches the
>   expectatations raised during earlier reviews. If you agree this is
>   the right direction then I can drop the RFC prefix on next submission.
>   If you do not agree then please do let me know where I missed
>   expectations.

Overall this matches my expectation. Let's wait for Alex/Jason's thoughts
before moving to next-level refinement.

btw as commented to last version, if this is the agreed direction probably
next version can be split into two parts: part1 contains the new framework
and converts intel vgpu driver to use it, then part2 for ims specific logic.

this way part1 can be verified and merged as a integral part. 😊