linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 09/14] x86/tdx: Account shared memory

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: <20231121094958.sagzaclakdnexd7a@box.shutemov.name>
Date:   Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:49:58 +0300
From:   "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
        "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
        "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        "thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "ashish.kalra@....com" <ashish.kalra@....com>,
        "kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "bhe@...hat.com" <bhe@...hat.com>,
        "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev" <linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 09/14] x86/tdx: Account shared memory

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 12:42:20PM +0300, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> > That being said, I think perhaps you can separate the /sysfs part as a separate
> > patch because it's not a mandatory part of this series but a nice to have.  Then
> > the /sysfs part can be reviewed separately. 
> 
> Okay, makes sense.

Hm. Without debugfs there's nothing really left in the patch. Accounting
itself is few lines.

I will probably leave it as is.

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov