[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b75db7610b50b8f4277d75ad7a736213d9eb5c5.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 19:59:43 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "Li, Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Bae, Chang Seok"
<chang.seok.bae@...el.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: "Fang, Peter" <peter.fang@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/16] KVM: x86: Expose APX foundational feature bit to
guests
On Tue, 2026-01-20 at 12:50 -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> > Chang, let's circle back internally and figure out who owns what.
>
> I'd come back here with positive TDX test results once available. For
> now, I would leave additional guarding or geting outside of this
> enabling scope.
After some discussion, I think this will be addressed with future TDX module
opt-in changes. So we can skip the TDX testing for this series. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists