[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aXc--OlFUhlgf6vm@tlindgre-MOBL1>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 12:16:24 +0200
From: Tony Lindgren <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
Cc: linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, reinette.chatre@...el.com,
ira.weiny@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com, sagis@...gle.com, vannapurve@...gle.com,
paulmck@...nel.org, nik.borisov@...e.com, zhenzhong.duan@...el.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, kas@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/26] x86/virt/seamldr: Block TDX Module updates if
any CPU is offline
On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 06:55:19AM -0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> P-SEAMLDR requires every CPU to call the SEAMLDR.INSTALL SEAMCALL during
> updates. So, every CPU should be online.
>
> Check if all CPUs are online and abort the update if any CPU is offline at
> the very beginning. Without this check, P-SEAMLDR will report failure at a
> later phase where the old TDX module is gone and TDs have to be killed.
Reviewed-by: Tony Lindgren <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists