[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32447c72-7447-4102-baf2-7af78020bee5@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 13:11:24 +1200
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
<seanjc@...gle.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
CC: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"sagis@...gle.com" <sagis@...gle.com>, "isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com"
<isaku.yamahata@...ux.intel.com>, "Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "dmatlack@...gle.com" <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
"isaku.yamahata@...il.com" <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] KVM: x86/mmu: Bug the VM if kvm_zap_gfn_range() is
called for TDX
>
> BTW, the role bit is the thing I'm wondering if we really need, because we have
> shared_mask. While the shared_mask is used for lots of things today, we need
> still need it for masking GPAs. Where as the role bit is only needed to know if
> a SP is for private (which we can tell from the GPA).
Yeah we can have a second thought on whether sp.role.private is
necessary. It is useful in shadow MMU (which we originally used to
support at the first place), but may not be necessary for TDP MMU.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists