linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 00/30] TDX KVM selftests

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: <CAAhR5DEG=Z_5DRGXcdoL0cxcSyuTqRGjixsGunDqtV=YtraOWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:00:43 -0500
From: Sagi Shahar <sagis@...gle.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
Cc: "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>, 
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	"Afranji, Ryan" <afranji@...gle.com>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, 
	"binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, 
	"ackerleytng@...gle.com" <ackerleytng@...gle.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, 
	"pratikrajesh.sampat@....com" <pratikrajesh.sampat@....com>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>, 
	"Wang, Roger" <runanwang@...gle.com>, 
	"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"ajones@...tanamicro.com" <ajones@...tanamicro.com>, "oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/30] TDX KVM selftests

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 1:12 PM Edgecombe, Rick P
<rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-08-11 at 10:38 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Please make cleaning up this mess the highest priority for TDX upstreaming.  I
> > am _thrilled_ (honestly) at the amount test coverage that has been developed for
> > TDX.  But I am equally angry that so much effort is being put into newfangled
> > TDX features, and that so little effort is being put into helping review and
> > polish this series.  I refuse to believe that I am the only person that could
> > look at the above code and come to the conclusion that it's simply unnacceptable.
>
> We were talking about this internally. Behind the scenes Reinette had actually
> spent a pretty large amount of time (the majority?) cleaning this series up
> actually, to even this level. This was some code cleanup, but also functional
> stuff like rooting out bugs where tests would give false positive passes. But
> the plan of action was to have some other TDX developers start reviewing it on
> the Intel side. I was also wondering how much time Sagi has to spend on it for
> follow on versions? We might want to think about a more direct process for
> changes->posting depending on if Sagi is able to spend more time.
>
> But Sean, if you want to save some time I think we can just accelerate this
> other reviewing. As far as new-fangled features, having this upstream is
> important even for that, because we are currently having to keep these tests
> plus follow on tests in sync across various development branches. So yea, it's
> time to get this over the line.

Thanks for the feedback Sean, I really appreciate you taking the time
to review the series.

I do have time to work on this one this week. I'm hoping to send an
updated version by the end of the week.