[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0eca4ddc74bc849b68d2ee93411be9b7d6329f0e.camel@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 20:33:14 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
"bagasdotme@...il.com" <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"nik.borisov@...e.com" <nik.borisov@...e.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"imammedo@...hat.com" <imammedo@...hat.com>,
"sagis@...gle.com" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 22/23] x86/mce: Improve error log of kernel space TDX
#MC due to erratum
On Tue, 2023-12-05 at 21:29 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:08:34PM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > The difference is for TDX host the kernel needs to initialize the TDX module
> > first before TDX can be used. The module initialization is done at runtime, and
> > the platform_tdx_enabled() here only returns whether the BIOS has enabled TDX.
> >
> > IIUC the X86_FEATURE_ flag doesn't suit this purpose because based on my
> > understanding the flag being present means the kernel has done some enabling
> > work and the feature is ready to use.
>
> Which flag do you mean? X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST?
>
> I mean, you would set a separate X86_FEATURE_TDX or so flag to denote
> that the BIOS has enabled it, at the end of that tdx_init() in the first
> patch.
>
Yes I understand what you said. My point is X86_FEATURE_TDX doesn't suit
because when it is set, the kernel actually hasn't done any enabling work yet
thus TDX is not available albeit the X86_FEATURE_TDX is set.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists