[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be2c8047-fd68-4858-bb92-bf301d7967b4@amd.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 16:05:22 +0530
From: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: bp@...en8.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
Thomas.Lendacky@....com, nikunj@....com, Santosh.Shukla@....com,
Vasant.Hegde@....com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com, David.Kaplan@....com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, peterz@...radead.org, seanjc@...gle.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
huibo.wang@....com, naveen.rao@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 14/17] x86/apic: Add kexec support for Secure AVIC
On 3/21/2025 9:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26 2025 at 14:35, Neeraj Upadhyay wrote:
>>
>> +/*
>> + * Unregister GPA of the Secure AVIC backing page.
>> + *
>> + * @apic_id: APIC ID of the vCPU. Use -1ULL for the current vCPU
>
> Yes, -1ULL is really a sensible value - NOT. Ever thought about
> signed/unsigned?
>
In table "Table 7: List of Supported Non-Automatic Events" of GHCB spec [1],
0xffff_ffff_ffff_ffff is used for Secure AVIC GHCB event
"RAX will have the APIC ID of the target vCPU or 0xffff_ffff_ffff_ffff
for the vCPU doing the call"
I am using -1ULL for that here.
[1] https://www.amd.com/content/dam/amd/en/documents/epyc-technical-docs/specifications/56421.pdf
>> + * doing the call.
>
> How would this function ever make sense to be invoked from a remote CPU?
>
I will update the interface in next version. Remote CPU interface is not used.
>> + * On success, returns previously registered GPA of the Secure AVIC
>> + * backing page in gpa arg.
>
> Please use proper kernel-doc formatting and not some made up thing which
> looks like it.
>
Ok. I will update this.
- Neeraj
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists