[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3270d9d05f4be252a11d5722267135201a976759.camel@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 19:03:18 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com" <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
"kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "linux-mips@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org"
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, "michael.roth@....com"
<michael.roth@....com>, "kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>, "palmer@...belt.com"
<palmer@...belt.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "chenhuacai@...nel.org" <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "x86@...nel.org"
<x86@...nel.org>, "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
"maddy@...ux.ibm.com" <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, "maobibo@...ngson.cn"
<maobibo@...ngson.cn>, "anup@...infault.org" <anup@...infault.org>,
"maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev"
<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Huang,
Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "frankja@...ux.ibm.com" <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
"pjw@...nel.org" <pjw@...nel.org>, "zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn"
<zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn>, "ackerleytng@...gle.com" <ackerleytng@...gle.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
"loongarch@...ts.linux.dev" <loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>,
"imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com" <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>, "kas@...nel.org"
<kas@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 23/25] KVM: TDX: Use guard() to acquire kvm->lock in
tdx_vm_ioctl()
On Tue, 2025-10-21 at 09:56 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> No? The default case doesn't copy the struct back even before this patch, it
> explicitly skips the copy_to_user().
Err, right. sorry.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists