[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d92e5301-9ca4-469a-8ae5-b36426e67356@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 07:46:55 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
pbonzini@...hat.com, isaku.yamahata@...il.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com,
xiaoyao.li@...el.com, yan.y.zhao@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, Yuan Yao <yuan.yao@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] x86/virt/tdx: Add SEAMCALL wrappers for TDX KeyID
management
On 11/25/24 07:44, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Nah, but the 0-day both does such a good job of detecting and
> reporting new warnings that I'm generally comfortable relying on
> sparse for something like this. Though as above, I'm ok with using
> "struct page" for the TDX pages.
Cool beans. Thanks for double-checking that KVM code you were concerned
about. It's much appreciated!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists