[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d1f70f8c-032e-4467-940c-18cf09c67eb2@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 22:34:48 +0800
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...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 6/11/2025 10:17 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> 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?
It mixes up common KVM defined hypercall leafs (KVM_HC_*) with TDX
specific TDVMCALL leafs. Surely it can work but it just doesn't look
clean to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists