[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <218550c574bd7670e079e9afe068ef88c3aa8cdf.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 01:06:37 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "sagis@...gle.com" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Zhao, Yan Y"
<yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"dmatlack@...gle.com" <dmatlack@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Introduce a quirk to control memslot zap behavior
On Thu, 2024-06-20 at 17:00 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>
> What I was suggesting is that we condition the skipping of the mirror/private
> EPT pages tables on the quirk, i.e. zap *everything* for TDX VMs if the quirk
> is
> enabled. Hence the very bizarre ABI.
Ah, I see now. Yes, that would be strange.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists