[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1676dd89cb71218195b52f3d8cf5982597120fc4.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 14:17:28 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "Li, Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com" <mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com>, "Huang,
Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@...el.com>, "Lindgren,
Tony" <tony.lindgren@...el.com>, "Chatre, Reinette"
<reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Shutemov,
Kirill" <kirill.shutemov@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] KVM: TDX: Exit to userspace for GetTdVmCallInfo
On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 10:37 +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> > Maybe we can use a TDX specific opt-in interface instead of TDVMCALL
> > specific
> > interface.
> > But not sure we should add it now or later.
>
> For simplicity, I prefer separate opt-in interfaces, it makes code simpler.
What is the problem with using the existing exit opt-in interface?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists