linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V9 0/2] KVM: x86: Make bus clock frequency for vAPIC timer configurable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5354a7ae-ca32-42fe-9231-a0d955bc8675@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:10:45 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
	<pbonzini@...hat.com>, <erdemaktas@...gle.com>, <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
	<vannapurve@...gle.com>, <jmattson@...gle.com>, <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
	<xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, <chao.gao@...el.com>, <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
	<yuan.yao@...el.com>
CC: <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V9 0/2] KVM: x86: Make bus clock frequency for vAPIC timer
 configurable

Hi Sean,

On 6/28/24 3:55 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 11:16:10 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> Changes from v8:
>> - v8: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1718043121.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com/
>> - Many changes to new udelay() utility patch as well as the APIC bus
>>    frequency test aimed to make it more robust (additional ASSERTs,
>>    consistent types, eliminate duplicate code, etc.) and useful with
>>    support for more user configuration. Please refer to individual patches for
>>    detailed changes.
>> - Series applies cleanly to next branch of kvm-x86 with HEAD
>>    e4e9e1067138e5620cf0500c3e5f6ebfb9d322c8.
>>
>> [...]
> 
> Applied to kvm-x86 misc, with all the changes mentioned in my earlier replies.
> I'm out next week, and don't want to merge the KVM changes without these tests,
> hence the rushed application.
> 
> Please holler if you disagree with anything (or if I broke something).  I won't
> respond until July 8th at the earliest, but worst case scenario we can do fixup
> patches after 6.11-rc1.

Thank you very much for taking the time to make the changes and apply the patches.
All the changes look good to me and passes my testing.

Now that the x86 udelay() utility no longer use cpu_relax(), should ARM
and RISC-V's udelay() be modified to match in this regard? I can prepare
(unable to test) changes for you to consider on your return.

Reinette