linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 0/1] KVM: TDX: Decrease TDX VM shutdown time

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: <7103b312-b02d-440e-9fa6-ba219a510c2d@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 16:55:46 +0800
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
 kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
 reinette.chatre@...el.com, tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com,
 binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com, isaku.yamahata@...el.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yan.y.zhao@...el.com, chao.gao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 0/1] KVM: TDX: Decrease TDX VM shutdown time

On 6/26/2025 11:58 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 12:51:57 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>> Changes in V4:
>>>
>>> 	Drop TDX_FLUSHVP_NOT_DONE change.  It will be done separately.
>>> 	Use KVM_BUG_ON() instead of WARN_ON().
>>> 	Correct kvm_trylock_all_vcpus() return value.
>>>
>>> Changes in V3:
>>> 	Refer:
>>>              https://lore.kernel.org/r/aAL4dT1pWG5dDDeo@google.com
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> Applied to kvm-x86 vmx, thanks!
>>
>> [1/1] KVM: TDX: Add sub-ioctl KVM_TDX_TERMINATE_VM
>>        https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/111a7311a016
> 
> Fixed up to address a docs goof[*], new hash:
> 
>        https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/e4775f57ad51
> 
> [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250626171004.7a1a024b@canb.auug.org.au

Hi Sean,

I think it's targeted for v6.17, right?

If so, do we need the enumeration for the new TDX ioctl? Yes, the 
userspace could always try and ignore the failure. But since the ship 
has not sailed, I would like to report it and hear your opinion.