[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fc6278a55deeccf8c67fba818647829a1dddcf0a.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:01:43 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
CC: "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@...el.com>, "isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com"
<isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Chen, Bo2" <chen.bo@...el.com>,
"sagis@...gle.com" <sagis@...gle.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Yuan, Hang" <hang.yuan@...el.com>, "Aktas,
Erdem" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "isaku.yamahata@...il.com"
<isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 120/130] KVM: TDX: Add a method to ignore dirty
logging
On Thu, 2024-03-14 at 18:35 -0700, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > On the subject of warnings and KVM_BUG_ON(), my feeling so far is
> > that
> > this series is quite aggressive about these. Is it due the
> > complexity
> > of the series? I think maybe we can remove some of the simple ones,
> > but
> > not sure if there was already some discussion on what level is
> > appropriate.
>
> KVM_BUG_ON() was helpful at the early stage. Because we don't hit
> them
> recently, it's okay to remove them. Will remove them.
Hmm. We probably need to do it case by case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists