linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/17] KVM: TDX: Handle SMI request as !CONFIG_KVM

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <90e3514a1fb4b6f656de98513e0b5c3ba0e7abbe.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 17:15:57 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
	<seanjc@...gle.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Li,
 Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Lindgren, Tony" <tony.lindgren@...el.com>,
	"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, "Chatre, Reinette"
	<reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku"
	<isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/17] KVM: TDX: Handle SMI request as !CONFIG_KVM_SMM

On Wed, 2025-02-12 at 13:51 +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
> > Rather than have a metric ton of stubs for all of the TDX variants, simply
> > omit
> > the wrappers when CONFIG_KVM_INTEL_TDX=n.  Quite nearly all of vmx/main.c
> > can go
> > under a single #ifdef.  That eliminates all the silly trampolines in the
> > generated
> > code, and almost all of the stubs.
> Thanks for the suggestion!
> 
> Since the changes will be across multiple sections of TDX KVM support,
> instead of modifying them individually, are you OK if we do it in a separate
> cleanup patch?

Paolo, since this would have small changes across the whole series, we would
have to figure out how get it into the "queued" kvm-coco-queue patches. I think
the two reasonable options would be to just have you do the change in kvm-coco-
queue, and we would merge our later other changes back into the resulting
branch. Or we could just do the macro as a cleanup patch after the base series.

We'll go with the second option unless we hear otherwise.