linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 02/21] x86/virt/tdx: Enhance tdh_mem_page

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

Message-ID: <c22f5684460f4e6a0adac3ff11f15b840b451d84.camel@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 15:32:00 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>
CC: "quic_eberman@...cinc.com" <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>, "Li, Xiaoyao"
	<xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Shutemov, Kirill" <kirill.shutemov@...el.com>,
	"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "david@...hat.com"
	<david@...hat.com>, "Li, Zhiquan1" <zhiquan1.li@...el.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y"
	<yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "tabba@...gle.com" <tabba@...gle.com>,
	"thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>, "michael.roth@....com"
	<michael.roth@....com>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Weiny, Ira"
	<ira.weiny@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"ackerleytng@...gle.com" <ackerleytng@...gle.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku"
	<isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "vbabka@...e.cz" <vbabka@...e.cz>, "Peng, Chao P"
	<chao.p.peng@...el.com>, "Du, Fan" <fan.du@...el.com>,
	"binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "jroedel@...e.de"
	<jroedel@...e.de>, "Miao, Jun" <jun.miao@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
	<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pgonda@...gle.com" <pgonda@...gle.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/21] x86/virt/tdx: Enhance tdh_mem_page_aug() to
 support huge pages

On Tue, 2025-07-08 at 08:29 -0700, Vishal Annapurve wrote:
> > The original seamcall wrapper patches used "u64 hpa", etc everywhere. The
> > feedback was that it was too error prone to not have types. We looked at
> > using
> > kvm types (hpa_t, etc), but the type checking was still just surface level
> > [0].
> > 
> > So the goal is to reduce errors and improve code readability. We can
> > consider
> > breaking symmetry if it is better that way. In this case though, why not use
> > struct folio?
> 
> My vote would be to prefer using "hpa" and not rely on folio/page
> structs for guest_memfd allocated memory wherever possible.

Is this because you want to enable struct page-less gmemfd in the future? Or
other reason?