linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 09/21] KVM: TDX: Enable 2MB mapping size after TD is RUNNABLE

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4737093ef45856b7c1c36398ee3d417d2a636c0c.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 00:47:28 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "quic_eberman@...cinc.com" <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>, "Li, Xiaoyao"
	<xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Du, Fan"
	<fan.du@...el.com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	"david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>, "thomas.lendacky@....com"
	<thomas.lendacky@....com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Li,
 Zhiquan1" <zhiquan1.li@...el.com>, "Shutemov, Kirill"
	<kirill.shutemov@...el.com>, "michael.roth@....com" <michael.roth@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Weiny, Ira"
	<ira.weiny@...el.com>, "Peng, Chao P" <chao.p.peng@...el.com>,
	"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku"
	<isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "ackerleytng@...gle.com"
	<ackerleytng@...gle.com>, "vbabka@...e.cz" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
	<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "tabba@...gle.com" <tabba@...gle.com>,
	"Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>, "jroedel@...e.de"
	<jroedel@...e.de>, "Miao, Jun" <jun.miao@...el.com>, "pgonda@...gle.com"
	<pgonda@...gle.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/21] KVM: TDX: Enable 2MB mapping size after TD is
 RUNNABLE

On Thu, 2025-06-12 at 17:44 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Maybe an "I can handle it" accept size bit that comes in the exit
> > qualification?
> 
> Eww, no.  Having to react on _every_ EPT violation would be annoying, and
> trying
> to debug issues where the guest is mixing options would probably be a
> nightmare.
> 
> I was thinking of something along the lines of an init-time or boot-time opt-
> in.

Fair.