[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231213120215.64wcryk5k75cymop@box>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 15:02:15 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Yuan Yao <yuan.yao@...el.com>, Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: tdx: hide unused tdx_dump_mce_info()
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 01:42:09PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/12/23 13:36, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >
> > When TDX is enabled but MCE is not, the tdx_dump_mce_info() function
> > fails to link:
>
> Thanks for the report, Arnd.
>
> The only way that TDX has to report integrity errors is an MCE. I'm not
> sure it even makes sense to have TDX support but not MCE support. Maybe
> we should just make TDX host support depend on MCE.
I agree. Silently ignore integrity errors is not good idea.
TDX module spec also supports it:
"The machine-check exception handler is expected to be implemented in the
VMM."
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists